Hi, Slava
Would you have more comments about this patch?
For my sight, only one wmb before "dev_gen" updating is enough to synchronize.
Thanks very much for your attention.
Best Regards
Feifei
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: Feifei Wang
> 发送时间: 2021年4月20日 16:42
> 收件人: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; Matan Azrad
> <ma...@nvidia.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shah...@nvidia.com>
> 抄送: dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com>; sta...@dpdk.org; Ruifeng Wang
> <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>
> 主题: 回复: [PATCH v1 3/4] net/mlx5: fix rebuild bug for Memory Region
> cache
>
> Hi, Slava
>
> I think the second wmb can be removed.
> As I know, wmb is just a barrier to keep the order between write and write.
> and it cannot tell the CPU when it should commit the changes.
>
> It is usually used before guard variable to keep the order that updating guard
> variable after some changes, which you want to release, have been done.
>
> For example, for the wmb after global cache update/before altering
> dev_gen, it can ensure the order that updating global cache before altering
> dev_gen:
> 1)If other agent load the changed "dev_gen", it can know the global cache
> has been updated.
> 2)If other agents load the unchanged, "dev_gen", it means the global cache
> has not been updated, and the local cache will not be flushed.
>
> As a result, we use wmb and guard variable "dev_gen" to ensure the global
> cache updating is "visible".
> The "visible" means when updating guard variable "dev_gen" is known by
> other agents, they also can confirm global cache has been updated in the
> meanwhile. Thus, just one wmb before altering dev_gen can ensure this.
>
> Best Regards
> Feifei
>
> > -----邮件原件-----
> > 发件人: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>
> > 发送时间: 2021年4月20日 15:54
> > 收件人: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>; Matan Azrad
> > <ma...@nvidia.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shah...@nvidia.com>
> > 抄送: dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com>; sta...@dpdk.org; Ruifeng Wang
> > <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>; nd
> > <n...@arm.com>
> > 主题: RE: [PATCH v1 3/4] net/mlx5: fix rebuild bug for Memory Region
> > cache
> >
> > Hi, Feifei
> >
> > In my opinion, there should be 2 barriers:
> > - after global cache update/before altering dev_gen, to ensure the
> > correct order
> > - after altering dev_gen to make this change visible for other agents
> > and to trigger local cache update
> >
> > With best regards,
> > Slava
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2021 10:30
> > > To: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; Matan Azrad
> > > <ma...@nvidia.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shah...@nvidia.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com>; sta...@dpdk.org; Ruifeng Wang
> > > <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>; nd
> > > <n...@arm.com>
> > > Subject: 回复: [PATCH v1 3/4] net/mlx5: fix rebuild bug for Memory
> > > Region cache
> > >
> > > Hi, Slava
> > >
> > > Another question suddenly occurred to me, in order to keep the order
> > > that rebuilding global cache before updating ”dev_gen“, the wmb
> > > should be before updating "dev_gen" rather than after it.
> > > Otherwise, in the out-of-order platforms, current order cannot be kept.
> > >
> > > Thus, we should change the code as:
> > > a) rebuild global cache;
> > > b) rte_smp_wmb();
> > > c) updating dev_gen
> > >
> > > Best Regards
> > > Feifei
> > > > -----邮件原件-----
> > > > 发件人: Feifei Wang
> > > > 发送时间: 2021年4月20日 13:54
> > > > 收件人: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; Matan Azrad
> > > > <ma...@nvidia.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shah...@nvidia.com>
> > > > 抄送: dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com>; sta...@dpdk.org; Ruifeng
> > Wang
> > > > <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>
> > > > 主题: 回复: [PATCH v1 3/4] net/mlx5: fix rebuild bug for Memory
> Region
> > > > cache
> > > >
> > > > Hi, Slava
> > > >
> > > > Thanks very much for your explanation.
> > > >
> > > > I can understand the app can wait all mbufs are returned to the
> > > > memory pool, and then it can free this mbufs, I agree with this.
> > > >
> > > > As a result, I will remove the bug fix patch from this series and
> > > > just replace the smp barrier with C11 thread fence. Thanks very
> > > > much for your patient explanation again.
> > > >
> > > > Best Regards
> > > > Feifei
> > > >
> > > > > -----邮件原件-----
> > > > > 发件人: Slava Ovsiienko <viachesl...@nvidia.com>
> > > > > 发送时间: 2021年4月20日 2:51
> > > > > 收件人: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>; Matan Azrad
> > > > > <ma...@nvidia.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shah...@nvidia.com>
> > > > > 抄送: dev@dpdk.org; nd <n...@arm.com>; sta...@dpdk.org; Ruifeng
> > > Wang
> > > > > <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com>
> > > > > 主题: RE: [PATCH v1 3/4] net/mlx5: fix rebuild bug for Memory
> > > > > Region cache
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi, Feifei
> > > > >
> > > > > Please, see below
> > > > >
> > > > > ....
> > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi, Feifei
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sorry, I do not follow what this patch fixes. Do we have
> > > > > > > some issue/bug with MR cache in practice?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This patch fixes the bug which is based on logical deduction,
> > > > > > and it doesn't actually happen.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Each Tx queue has its own dedicated "local" cache for MRs to
> > > > > > > convert buffer address in mbufs being transmitted to LKeys
> > > > > > > (HW-related entity
> > > > > > > handle) and the "global" cache for all MR registered on the
> > > > > > > device.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > AFAIK, how conversion happens in datapath:
> > > > > > > - check the local queue cache flush request
> > > > > > > - lookup in local cache
> > > > > > > - if not found:
> > > > > > > - acquire lock for global cache read access
> > > > > > > - lookup in global cache
> > > > > > > - release lock for global cache
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How cache update on memory freeing/unregistering happens:
> > > > > > > - acquire lock for global cache write access
> > > > > > > - [a] remove relevant MRs from the global cache
> > > > > > > - [b] set local caches flush request
> > > > > > > - free global cache lock
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If I understand correctly, your patch swaps [a] and [b], and
> > > > > > > local caches flush is requested earlier. What problem does it
> > > > > > > solve?
> > > > > > > It is not supposed there are in datapath some mbufs
> > > > > > > referencing to the memory being freed. Application must
> > > > > > > ensure this and must not allocate new mbufs from this memory
> > > > > > > regions
> > being freed.
> > > > > > > Hence, the lookups for these MRs in caches should not occur.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For your first point that, application can take charge of
> > > > > > preventing MR freed memory being allocated to data path.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does it means that If there is an emergency of MR fragment,
> > > > > > such as hotplug, the application must inform thedata path in
> > > > > > advance, and this memory will not be allocated, and then the
> > > > > > control path will free this memory? If application can do
> > > > > > like this, I agree that this bug
> > > > cannot happen.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, this is the only correct way for application to operate.
> > > > > Let's suppose we have some memory area that application wants to
> > free.
> > > > > ALL references to this area must be removed. If we have some
> > > > > mbufs allocated from this area, it means that we have memory
> > > > > pool created
> > > there.
> > > > >
> > > > > What application should do:
> > > > > - notify all its components/agents the memory area is going to
> > > > > be freed
> > > > > - all components/agents free the mbufs they might own
> > > > > - PMD might not support freeing for some mbufs (for example
> > > > > being sent and awaiting for completion), so app should just wait
> > > > > - wait till all mbufs are returned to the memory pool (by
> > > > > monitoring available obj == pool size)
> > > > >
> > > > > Otherwise - it is dangerous to free the memory. There are just
> > > > > some mbufs still allocated, it is regardless to buf address to
> > > > > MR translation. We just can't free the memory - the mapping will
> > > > > be destroyed and might cause the segmentation fault by SW or
> > > > > some HW issues on DMA access to unmapped memory. It is very
> > > > > generic safety approach - do not free the memory that is still in use.
> > > > > Hence, at the moment of freeing and unregistering the MR, there
> > > > > MUST BE NO any
> > > > mbufs in flight referencing to the addresses being freed.
> > > > > No translation to MR being invalidated can happen.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > For other side, the cache flush has negative effect - the
> > > > > > > local cache is getting empty and can't provide translation
> > > > > > > for other valid (not being removed) MRs, and the translation
> > > > > > > has to look up in the global cache, that is locked now for
> > > > > > > rebuilding, this causes the delays in datapatch
> > > > > > on acquiring global cache lock.
> > > > > > > So, I see some potential performance impact.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If above assumption is true, we can go to your second point. I
> > > > > > think this is a problem of the tradeoff between cache
> > > > > > coherence and
> > > > > performance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I can understand your meaning that though global cache has
> > > > > > been changed, we should keep the valid MR in local cache as
> > > > > > long as possible to ensure the fast searching speed.
> > > > > > In the meanwhile, the local cache can be rebuilt later to
> > > > > > reduce its waiting time for acquiring the global cache lock.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, this mechanism just ensures the performance
> > > > > > unchanged for the first few mbufs.
> > > > > > During the next mbufs lkey searching after 'dev_gen' updated,
> > > > > > it is still necessary to update the local cache. And the
> > > > > > performance can firstly reduce and then returns. Thus, no
> > > > > > matter whether there is this patch or not, the performance
> > > > > > will jitter in a certain period of
> > > time.
> > > > >
> > > > > Local cache should be updated to remove MRs no longer valid. But
> > > > > we just flush the entire cache.
> > > > > Let's suppose we have valid MR0, MR1, and not valid MRX in local
> cache.
> > > > > And there are traffic in the datapath for MR0 and MR1, and no
> > > > > traffic for MRX anymore.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) If we do as you propose:
> > > > > a) take a lock
> > > > > b) request flush local cache first - all MR0, MR1, MRX will be
> > > > > removed on translation in datapath
> > > > > c) update global cache,
> > > > > d) free lock
> > > > > All the traffic for valid MR0, MR1 ALWAYS will be blocked on
> > > > > lock taken for cache update since point b) till point d).
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) If we do as it is implemented now:
> > > > > a) take a lock
> > > > > b) update global cache
> > > > > c) request flush local cache
> > > > > d) free lock
> > > > > The traffic MIGHT be locked ONLY for MRs non-existing in local
> > > > > cache (not happens for MR0 and MR1, must not happen for MRX),
> > > > > and probability should be minor. And lock might happen since c)
> > > > > till
> > > > > d)
> > > > > - quite short period of time
> > > > >
> > > > > Summary, the difference between 1) and 2)
> > > > >
> > > > > Lock probability:
> > > > > - 1) lock ALWAYS happen for ANY MR translation after b),
> > > > > 2) lock MIGHT happen, for cache miss ONLY, after c)
> > > > >
> > > > > Lock duration:
> > > > > - 1) lock since b) till d),
> > > > > 2) lock since c) till d), that seems to be much shorter.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Finally, in conclusion, I tend to think that the bottom layer
> > > > > > can do more things to ensure the correct execution of the
> > > > > > program, which may have a negative impact on the performance
> > > > > > in a short time, but in the long run, the performance will
> > > > > > eventually
> > come back.
> > > > > > Furthermore, maybe we should pay attention to the performance
> > > > > > in the stable period, and try our best to ensure the
> > > > > > correctness of the program in case of
> > > > > emergencies.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we have some mbufs still allocated in memory being freed -
> > > > > there is nothing to say about correctness, it is totally
> > > > > incorrect. In my opinion, we should not think how to mitigate
> > > > > this incorrect behavior, we should not encourage application
> > > > > developers to follow the wrong
> > > > approaches.
> > > > >
> > > > > With best regards,
> > > > > Slava
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best Regards
> > > > > > Feifei
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > With best regards,
> > > > > > > Slava
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2021 9:19
> > > > > > > > To: Matan Azrad <ma...@nvidia.com>; Shahaf Shuler
> > > > > > > > <shah...@nvidia.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
> > > > > > > > <viachesl...@nvidia.com>; Yongseok Koh
> > > > > > > > <ys...@mellanox.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; n...@arm.com; Feifei Wang
> > > > > <feifei.wa...@arm.com>;
> > > > > > > > sta...@dpdk.org; Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > Subject: [PATCH v1 3/4] net/mlx5: fix rebuild bug for
> > > > > > > > Memory Region cache
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 'dev_gen' is a variable to inform other cores to flush
> > > > > > > > their local cache when global cache is rebuilt.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, if 'dev_gen' is updated after global cache is
> > > > > > > > rebuilt, other cores may load a wrong memory region lkey
> > > > > > > > value from old local
> > > > > > cache.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Timeslot main core worker core
> > > > > > > > 1 rebuild global cache
> > > > > > > > 2 load unchanged dev_gen
> > > > > > > > 3 update dev_gen
> > > > > > > > 4 look up old local cache
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From the example above, we can see that though global
> > > > > > > > cache is rebuilt, due to that dev_gen is not updated, the
> > > > > > > > worker core may look up old cache table and receive a
> > > > > > > > wrong memory region
> > > lkey value.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > To fix this, updating 'dev_gen' should be moved before
> > > > > > > > rebuilding global cache to inform worker cores to flush
> > > > > > > > their local cache when global cache start rebuilding. And
> > > > > > > > wmb can ensure the sequence of this
> > > > > > > process.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fixes: 974f1e7ef146 ("net/mlx5: add new memory region
> > > > > > > > support")
> > > > > > > > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Suggested-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Feifei Wang <feifei.wa...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.w...@arm.com>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c | 37
> > > > > > > > +++++++++++++++++--------------------
> > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c
> > > > > > > > b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c index
> > > > > > > > da4e91fc2..7ce1d3e64 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c
> > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c
> > > > > > > > @@ -103,20 +103,18 @@ mlx5_mr_mem_event_free_cb(struct
> > > > > > > > mlx5_dev_ctx_shared *sh,
> > > > > > > > rebuild = 1;
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > if (rebuild) {
> > > > > > > > - mlx5_mr_rebuild_cache(&sh->share_cache);
> > > > > > > > + ++sh->share_cache.dev_gen;
> > > > > > > > + DEBUG("broadcasting local cache flush, gen=%d",
> > > > > > > > + sh->share_cache.dev_gen);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > /*
> > > > > > > > * Flush local caches by propagating
> > > > > > > > invalidation
> > > > across cores.
> > > > > > > > - * rte_smp_wmb() is enough to synchronize this
> > > > event. If
> > > > > > > > one of
> > > > > > > > - * freed memsegs is seen by other core, that
> > > > > > > > means
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > memseg
> > > > > > > > - * has been allocated by allocator, which will
> > > > > > > > come
> > > > after this
> > > > > > > > - * free call. Therefore, this store instruction
> > > > (incrementing
> > > > > > > > - * generation below) will be guaranteed to be
> > > > > > > > seen
> > > > by other
> > > > > > > > core
> > > > > > > > - * before the core sees the newly allocated
> > > > > > > > memory.
> > > > > > > > + * rte_smp_wmb() is to keep the order that
> > > > > > > > dev_gen
> > > > > > > > updated before
> > > > > > > > + * rebuilding global cache. Therefore, other
> > > > > > > > core can
> > > > flush
> > > > > > > > their
> > > > > > > > + * local cache on time.
> > > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > > - ++sh->share_cache.dev_gen;
> > > > > > > > - DEBUG("broadcasting local cache flush, gen=%d",
> > > > > > > > - sh->share_cache.dev_gen);
> > > > > > > > rte_smp_wmb();
> > > > > > > > + mlx5_mr_rebuild_cache(&sh->share_cache);
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > rte_rwlock_write_unlock(&sh->share_cache.rwlock);
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > @@ -407,20 +405,19 @@ mlx5_dma_unmap(struct
> rte_pci_device
> > > > > > *pdev,
> > > > > > > void
> > > > > > > > *addr,
> > > > > > > > mlx5_mr_free(mr, sh->share_cache.dereg_mr_cb);
> > > > > > > > DEBUG("port %u remove MR(%p) from list", dev->data-
> > > > >port_id,
> > > > > > > > (void *)mr);
> > > > > > > > - mlx5_mr_rebuild_cache(&sh->share_cache);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > + ++sh->share_cache.dev_gen;
> > > > > > > > + DEBUG("broadcasting local cache flush, gen=%d",
> > > > > > > > + sh->share_cache.dev_gen);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > /*
> > > > > > > > * Flush local caches by propagating invalidation
> > > > > > > > across cores.
> > > > > > > > - * rte_smp_wmb() is enough to synchronize this event. If
> > > > one of
> > > > > > > > - * freed memsegs is seen by other core, that means the
> > > > memseg
> > > > > > > > - * has been allocated by allocator, which will come
> > > > > > > > after this
> > > > > > > > - * free call. Therefore, this store instruction
> > > > > > > > (incrementing
> > > > > > > > - * generation below) will be guaranteed to be seen by
> > > > > > > > other
> > > > core
> > > > > > > > - * before the core sees the newly allocated memory.
> > > > > > > > + * rte_smp_wmb() is to keep the order that dev_gen
> > > > updated
> > > > > > > > before
> > > > > > > > + * rebuilding global cache. Therefore, other core can
> > > > > > > > +flush
> > > > their
> > > > > > > > + * local cache on time.
> > > > > > > > */
> > > > > > > > - ++sh->share_cache.dev_gen;
> > > > > > > > - DEBUG("broadcasting local cache flush, gen=%d",
> > > > > > > > - sh->share_cache.dev_gen);
> > > > > > > > rte_smp_wmb();
> > > > > > > > + mlx5_mr_rebuild_cache(&sh->share_cache);
> > > > > > > > rte_rwlock_read_unlock(&sh->share_cache.rwlock);
> > > > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 2.25.1
