From: Ranjit Menon <ranjit.menon@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com>, <talshn@mellanox.com>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <pallavi.kadam@intel.com>,
<navasile@linux.microsoft.com>, <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
<harini.ramakrishnan@microsoft.com>, <ocardona@microsoft.com>,
<david.marchand@redhat.com>, <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
<bruce.richardson@intel.com>, <jerinj@marvell.com>,
<drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>,
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: align rte_mbuf for Windows
Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 15:15:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d33535d0-cebf-c4a5-59d8-5f8c8f0ba8db@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1935350.G7KYNPxu0G@thomas>
On 5/19/2020 1:18 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 19/05/2020 21:57, Dmitry Kozlyuk:
>> On Tue, 19 May 2020 20:49:50 +0200
>> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> +Cc more maintainers
>>>
>>> 19/05/2020 20:41, talshn@mellanox.com:
>>>> From: Tal Shnaiderman <talshn@mellanox.com>
>>>>
>>>> Using uint32_t type bit-fields in Windows will pads the
>>>> 'L2/L3/L4 and tunnel information' union with additional bits.
>>>>
>>>> This padding causes rte_mbuf size misalignment and the total size
>>>> increases to 3 cache-lines.
>>>>
>>>> Changed packet_type bit-fields types from uint32_t to uint8_t
>>>> to allow unified 2 cache-line structure size.
>>>>
>>>> Added the __extension__ attribute over the modified struct to avoid
>>>> the warning:
>>>>
>>>> type of bit-field ... is a GCC extension [-pedantic]
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Tal Shnaiderman <talshn@mellanox.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h | 11 ++++++-----
>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
>>>> b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h index b9a59c879..82441555e 100644
>>>> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
>>>> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
>>>> @@ -521,11 +521,12 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
>>>> RTE_STD_C11
>>>> union {
>>>> uint32_t packet_type; /**< L2/L3/L4 and tunnel
>>>> information. */
>>>> + __extension__
>>>> struct {
>>>> - uint32_t l2_type:4; /**< (Outer) L2 type.
>>>> */
>>>> - uint32_t l3_type:4; /**< (Outer) L3 type.
>>>> */
>>>> - uint32_t l4_type:4; /**< (Outer) L4 type.
>>>> */
>>>> - uint32_t tun_type:4; /**< Tunnel type. */
>>>> + uint8_t l2_type:4; /**< (Outer) L2 type. */
>>>> + uint8_t l3_type:4; /**< (Outer) L3 type. */
>>>> + uint8_t l4_type:4; /**< (Outer) L4 type. */
>>>> + uint8_t tun_type:4; /**< Tunnel type. */
>>>> RTE_STD_C11
>>>> union {
>>>> uint8_t inner_esp_next_proto;
>>>> @@ -541,7 +542,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
>>>> /**< Inner L3 type. */
>>>> };
>>>> };
>>>> - uint32_t inner_l4_type:4; /**< Inner L4
>>>> type. */
>>>> + uint8_t inner_l4_type:4; /**< Inner L4
>>>> type. */ };
>>>> };
>>>
>>>
>> Such a clean and simple solution to what seemed to require compiler
>> workaround or fix! All offsets are equal on Windows and Linux for the
>> following toolchains, x86_64:
>>
>> * cross-compilation with MinGW-w64 6.0.0 GCC 9.3.0
>> * Windows native MinGW-w64 6.0.0 GCC 8.1.0 and Clang 9.0.1
>>
>> Tested-by: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com>
> Would be interesting to see an offset comparison in little and big endian.
>
>
BTW, this is the exact fix we used for the alignment issue in the
Windows draft repo.
It completely skipped my mind, when we were discussing this during the
community call.
See this code section in lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h in the draft repo:
uint32_t packet_type; /**< L2/L3/L4 and tunnel information. */
struct {
#ifndef _WIN64
uint32_t l2_type:4; /**< (Outer) L2 type. */
uint32_t l3_type:4; /**< (Outer) L3 type. */
uint32_t l4_type:4; /**< (Outer) L4 type. */
uint32_t tun_type:4; /**< Tunnel type. */
#else
uint8_t l2_type:4; /**< (Outer) L2 type. */
uint8_t l3_type:4; /**< (Outer) L3 type. */
uint8_t l4_type:4; /**< (Outer) L4 type. */
uint8_t tun_type:4; /**< Tunnel type. */
#endif
RTE_STD_C11
union {
uint8_t inner_esp_next_proto;
/**< ESP next protocol type, valid if
* RTE_PTYPE_TUNNEL_ESP tunnel type is set
* on both Tx and Rx.
*/
__extension__
struct {
uint8_t inner_l2_type:4;
/**< Inner L2 type. */
uint8_t inner_l3_type:4;
/**< Inner L3 type. */
};
};
#ifndef _WIN64
uint32_t inner_l4_type:4; /**< Inner L4 type. */
#else
uint8_t inner_l4_type:4; /**< Inner L4 type. */
#endif
};
We didn't have the bandwidth to test this on other OS, so we used
#ifdef, but we know this allowed us to be as performant as Linux (using
L3Fwd).
Therefore:
Acked-by: Ranjit Menon <ranjit.menon@intel.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-19 22:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-19 18:41 talshn
2020-05-19 18:49 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-19 19:57 ` Dmitry Kozlyuk
2020-05-19 20:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-19 22:15 ` Ranjit Menon [this message]
2020-06-11 11:43 ` Olivier Matz
2020-06-11 14:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=d33535d0-cebf-c4a5-59d8-5f8c8f0ba8db@intel.com \
--to=ranjit.menon@intel.com \
--cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=dmitry.kozliuk@gmail.com \
--cc=drc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=harini.ramakrishnan@microsoft.com \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=navasile@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=ocardona@microsoft.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=pallavi.kadam@intel.com \
--cc=ruifeng.wang@arm.com \
--cc=talshn@mellanox.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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).