From: Phil Yang <Phil.Yang@arm.com>
To: Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>,
Alexander Kozyrev <akozyrev@mellanox.com>,
Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>,
Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
Cc: "drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
nd <nd@arm.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, nd <nd@arm.com>,
nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/mlx5: relaxed ordering for multi-packet RQ buffer refcnt
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 06:11:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <VE1PR08MB4640CE2CDEA76862C2AD520AE9760@VE1PR08MB4640.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DB6PR0802MB2216C67B62463133DBB2A49F98760@DB6PR0802MB2216.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com>
<snip>
>
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/mlx5: relaxed ordering for
> > > multi-packet RQ buffer refcnt
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > We are also doing C11 atomics converting for other components.
> > > Your insight would be much appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Phil Yang
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Phil Yang
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2020 4:27 PM
> > > > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > > > Cc: matan@mellanox.com; shahafs@mellanox.com;
> > > > viacheslavo@mellanox.com; Honnappa Nagarahalli
> > > > <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com>; drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com; nd
> > > > <nd@arm.com>
> > > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/mlx5: relaxed ordering for
> > > > multi-packet RQ buffer refcnt
> > > >
> > > > Use c11 atomics with explicit ordering instead of the rte_atomic ops
> > > > which enforce unnecessary barriers on aarch64.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Phil Yang <phil.yang@arm.com>
> > > > ---
<...>
> > > >
> > > > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c | 2 +- drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
> > > > | 16 +++++++++------- drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h | 2 +-
> > > > 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c
> > > > b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c index dda0073..7f487f1 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c
> > > > @@ -1545,7 +1545,7 @@ mlx5_mprq_buf_init(struct rte_mempool
> *mp,
> > > > void *opaque_arg,
> > > >
> > > > memset(_m, 0, sizeof(*buf));
> > > > buf->mp = mp;
> > > > -rte_atomic16_set(&buf->refcnt, 1);
> > > > +__atomic_store_n(&buf->refcnt, 1, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > for (j = 0; j != strd_n; ++j) {
> > > > shinfo = &buf->shinfos[j];
> > > > shinfo->free_cb = mlx5_mprq_buf_free_cb; diff --git
> > > > a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c index
> > > > e4106bf..f0eda88 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
> > > > @@ -1595,10 +1595,11 @@ mlx5_mprq_buf_free_cb(void *addr
> > > __rte_unused,
> > > > void *opaque) {
> > > > struct mlx5_mprq_buf *buf = opaque;
> > > >
> > > > -if (rte_atomic16_read(&buf->refcnt) == 1) {
> > > > +if (__atomic_load_n(&buf->refcnt, __ATOMIC_RELAXED) == 1) {
> > > > rte_mempool_put(buf->mp, buf);
> > > > -} else if (rte_atomic16_add_return(&buf->refcnt, -1) == 0) {
> > > > -rte_atomic16_set(&buf->refcnt, 1);
> > > > +} else if (unlikely(__atomic_sub_fetch(&buf->refcnt, 1,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED) == 0)) {
> > > > +__atomic_store_n(&buf->refcnt, 1, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> > > > rte_mempool_put(buf->mp, buf);
> > > > }
> > > > }
> > > > @@ -1678,7 +1679,8 @@ mlx5_rx_burst_mprq(void *dpdk_rxq, struct
> > > > rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
> > > >
> > > > if (consumed_strd == strd_n) {
> > > > /* Replace WQE only if the buffer is still in use. */
> > > > -if (rte_atomic16_read(&buf->refcnt) > 1) {
> > > > +if (__atomic_load_n(&buf->refcnt,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED) > 1) {
> > > > mprq_buf_replace(rxq, rq_ci & wq_mask,
> > > strd_n);
> > > > /* Release the old buffer. */
> > > > mlx5_mprq_buf_free(buf);
> > > > @@ -1790,9 +1792,9 @@ mlx5_rx_burst_mprq(void *dpdk_rxq, struct
> > > > rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
> > > > void *buf_addr;
> > > >
> > > > /* Increment the refcnt of the whole chunk. */
> > > > -rte_atomic16_add_return(&buf->refcnt, 1);
> rte_atomic16_add_return includes a full barrier along with atomic operation.
> But is full barrier required here? For ex: __atomic_add_fetch(&buf->refcnt, 1,
> __ATOMIC_RELAXED) will offer atomicity, but no barrier. Would that be
> enough?
>
> > > > -MLX5_ASSERT((uint16_t)rte_atomic16_read(&buf-
> > > > >refcnt) <=
> > > > - strd_n + 1);
> > > > +__atomic_add_fetch(&buf->refcnt, 1,
> > > > __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE);
The atomic load in MLX5_ASSERT() accesses the same memory space as the previous __atomic_add_fetch() does.
They will access this memory space in the program order when we enabled MLX5_PMD_DEBUG. So the ACQUIRE barrier in __atomic_add_fetch() becomes unnecessary.
By changing it to RELAXED ordering, this patch got 7.6% performance improvement on N1 (making it generate A72 alike instructions).
Could you please also try it on your testbed, Alex?
>
> Can you replace just the above line with the following lines and test it?
>
> __atomic_add_fetch(&buf->refcnt, 1, __ATOMIC_RELAXED);
> __atomic_thread_fence(__ATOMIC_ACQ_REL);
>
> This should make the generated code same as before this patch. Let me
> know if you would prefer us to re-spin the patch instead (for testing).
>
> > > > +MLX5_ASSERT(__atomic_load_n(&buf->refcnt,
> > > > + __ATOMIC_RELAXED) <= strd_n + 1);
> > > > buf_addr = RTE_PTR_SUB(addr,
> > > > RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM);
> > > > /*
> > > > * MLX5 device doesn't use iova but it is necessary in a
> > > diff
> > > > --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h
> > > > index 26621ff..0fc15f3 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h
> > > > @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ struct rxq_zip {
> > > > /* Multi-Packet RQ buffer header. */ struct mlx5_mprq_buf {
> > > > struct rte_mempool *mp;
> > > > -rte_atomic16_t refcnt; /* Atomically accessed refcnt. */
> > > > +uint16_t refcnt; /* Atomically accessed refcnt. */
> > > > uint8_t pad[RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM]; /* Headroom for the first
> > > packet.
> > > > */
> > > > struct rte_mbuf_ext_shared_info shinfos[];
> > > > /*
> > > > --
> > > > 2.7.4
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-23 6:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-13 12:38 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v1 0/6] barrier fix and optimization for mlx5 on aarch64 Gavin Hu
2020-02-13 12:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v1 1/6] net/mlx5: relax the barrier for UAR write Gavin Hu
2020-02-13 12:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v1 2/6] net/mlx5: use cio barrier before the BF WQE Gavin Hu
2020-02-13 12:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v1 3/6] net/mlx5: add missing barrier Gavin Hu
2020-02-13 12:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v1 4/6] net/mlx5: add descriptive comment for a barrier Gavin Hu
2020-02-13 12:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v1 5/6] net/mlx5: non-cacheable mapping defaulted for aarch64 Gavin Hu
2020-02-13 12:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v1 6/6] net/mlx5: relaxed ordering for multi-packet RQ buffer refcnt Gavin Hu
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 0/7] introduce new barrier class and use it for mlx5 PMD Gavin Hu
2020-04-10 17:20 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-04-11 3:46 ` Gavin Hu
2020-04-13 9:51 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-04-13 16:46 ` Gavin Hu
2020-05-11 18:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC] eal: adjust barriers for IO on Armv8-a Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-05-12 6:18 ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-05-12 6:42 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-12 8:02 ` Ruifeng Wang
2020-05-12 8:28 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-12 21:44 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-05-13 14:49 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-05-14 1:02 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-06-27 19:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-06-27 19:25 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-06-30 5:13 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-07-03 18:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] " Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-03 18:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] doc: update armv8-a IO barrier changes Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-05 0:57 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-07-03 18:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] doc: update deprecation of CIO barrier APIs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-05 0:57 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-07-07 20:19 ` Ajit Khaparde
2020-07-08 11:05 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-06 23:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] eal: adjust barriers for IO on Armv8-a Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-06 23:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] doc: update armv8-a IO barrier changes Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-07 8:36 ` David Marchand
2020-07-07 18:37 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-06 23:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] doc: update deprecation of CIO barrier APIs Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-07 8:39 ` David Marchand
2020-07-07 20:14 ` David Christensen
2020-07-08 11:49 ` David Marchand
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 1/7] eal: introduce new class of barriers for DMA use cases Gavin Hu
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 2/7] net/mlx5: dmb for immediate doorbell ring on aarch64 Gavin Hu
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 3/7] net/mlx5: relax barrier to order UAR writes " Gavin Hu
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 4/7] net/mlx5: relax barrier for aarch64 Gavin Hu
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 5/7] net/mlx5: add descriptive comment for a barrier Gavin Hu
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 6/7] net/mlx5: relax ordering for multi-packet RQ buffer refcnt Gavin Hu
2020-06-23 8:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] net/mlx5: relaxed " Phil Yang
2020-07-13 3:02 ` Phil Yang
2020-07-20 23:21 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-07-21 1:55 ` Phil Yang
2020-07-21 3:58 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-07-21 4:03 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-21 4:11 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-07-22 12:06 ` Phil Yang
2020-07-23 4:47 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-07-23 6:11 ` Phil Yang [this message]
2020-07-23 16:53 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-07-27 14:52 ` Phil Yang
2020-08-06 2:43 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-08-11 5:20 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-09-02 21:52 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-09-03 2:55 ` Phil Yang
2020-09-09 13:29 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-09-10 1:34 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-09-03 2:53 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] " Phil Yang
2020-09-10 1:30 ` Honnappa Nagarahalli
2020-09-10 1:36 ` Alexander Kozyrev
2020-09-29 15:22 ` Phil Yang
2020-09-30 12:44 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-09-30 12:52 ` Raslan Darawsheh
2020-09-30 13:57 ` Raslan Darawsheh
2020-04-10 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC v2 7/7] doc: clarify one configuration in mlx5 guide Gavin Hu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=VE1PR08MB4640CE2CDEA76862C2AD520AE9760@VE1PR08MB4640.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com \
--to=phil.yang@arm.com \
--cc=Honnappa.Nagarahalli@arm.com \
--cc=akozyrev@mellanox.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=matan@mellanox.com \
--cc=nd@arm.com \
--cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
--cc=viacheslavo@mellanox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).