From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
To: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>, shahafs@mellanox.com
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/mlx5: revert mbuf address calculation for x86
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:51:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b10a4733-24f4-2639-25a5-98a5e6983538@redhat.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190327115130.V2Loc0Yq44MkerFpyasLzcqfz3sBLNl6iTd2hksHTEM@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190325191310.20594-1-yskoh@mellanox.com>
On 25/03/2019 19:13, Yongseok Koh wrote:
> When replenishing mbufs on Rx, buffer address (mbuf->buf_addr) should be
> loaded. non-x86 processors (mostly RISC such as ARM and Power) are more
> vulnerable to load stall. For x86, reducing the number of instructions
> seems to matter most.
>
> For x86, this is simply a load but for other architectures, it is
> calculated from the address of mbuf structure by rte_mbuf_buf_addr()
> without having to load the first cacheline of the mbuf.
>
Hi Yongseok,
> Fixes: 12d468a62bc1 ("net/mlx5: fix instruction hotspot on replenishing Rx buffer")
A similar backport was just added into 18.11.1-RC2, should it be
reverted? I'm not keen to put another fix for it in for 18.11.1 at this
stage, I think it can be part of 18.11.2. WDYT?
thanks,
Kevin.
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec.h | 14 +++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec.h b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec.h
> index 5df8e291e6..4220b08dd2 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx_vec.h
> @@ -102,9 +102,21 @@ mlx5_rx_replenish_bulk_mbuf(struct mlx5_rxq_data *rxq, uint16_t n)
> return;
> }
> for (i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
> - void *buf_addr = rte_mbuf_buf_addr(elts[i], rxq->mp);
> + void *buf_addr;
>
> + /*
> + * Load the virtual address for Rx WQE. non-x86 processors
> + * (mostly RISC such as ARM and Power) are more vulnerable to
> + * load stall. For x86, reducing the number of instructions
> + * seems to matter most.
> + */
> +#ifdef RTE_ARCH_X86_64
> + buf_addr = elts[i]->buf_addr;
> + assert(buf_addr == rte_mbuf_buf_addr(elts[i], rxq->mp));
> +#else
> + buf_addr = rte_mbuf_buf_addr(elts[i], rxq->mp);
> assert(buf_addr == elts[i]->buf_addr);
> +#endif
> wq[i].addr = rte_cpu_to_be_64((uintptr_t)buf_addr +
> RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM);
> /* If there's only one MR, no need to replace LKey in WQE. */
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-27 11:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-25 19:13 Yongseok Koh
2019-03-25 19:13 ` Yongseok Koh
2019-03-27 11:51 ` Kevin Traynor [this message]
2019-03-27 11:51 ` Kevin Traynor
2019-03-27 22:21 ` Yongseok Koh
2019-03-27 22:21 ` Yongseok Koh
2019-04-01 10:57 ` Shahaf Shuler
2019-04-01 10:57 ` Shahaf Shuler
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=b10a4733-24f4-2639-25a5-98a5e6983538@redhat.com \
--to=ktraynor@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=yskoh@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).