On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 02:14:00PM +0100, Song, Yoong Siang wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 4, 2025 6:10 PM, Fijalkowski, Maciej
> <maciej.fijalkow...@intel.com> wrote:
> >On Tue, Feb 04, 2025 at 08:49:07AM +0800, Song Yoong Siang wrote:
> >
> >> Enable Launch Time Control (LTC) support for XDP zero copy via XDP Tx
> >> metadata framework.
> >>
> >> This patch has been tested with tools/testing/selftests/bpf/xdp_hw_metadata
> >> on Intel I225-LM Ethernet controller. Below are the test steps and result.
> >>
> >> Test 1: Send a single packet with the launch time set to 1 s in the future.
> >>
> >> Test steps:
> >> 1. On the DUT, start the xdp_hw_metadata selftest application:
> >> $ sudo ./xdp_hw_metadata enp2s0 -l 1000000000 -L 1
> >>
> >> 2. On the Link Partner, send a UDP packet with VLAN priority 1 to port 9091
> >> of the DUT.
> >>
> >> Result:
> >> When the launch time is set to 1 s in the future, the delta between the
> >> launch time and the transmit hardware timestamp is 0.016 us, as shown in
> >> printout of the xdp_hw_metadata application below.
> >> 0x562ff5dc8880: rx_desc[4]->addr=84110 addr=84110 comp_addr=84110 EoP
> >> rx_hash: 0xE343384 with RSS type:0x1
> >> HW RX-time: 1734578015467548904 (sec:1734578015.4675)
> >> delta to User RX-time sec:0.0002 (183.103 usec)
> >> XDP RX-time: 1734578015467651698 (sec:1734578015.4677)
> >> delta to User RX-time sec:0.0001 (80.309 usec)
> >> No rx_vlan_tci or rx_vlan_proto, err=-95
> >> 0x562ff5dc8880: ping-pong with csum=561c (want c7dd)
> >> csum_start=34 csum_offset=6
> >> HW RX-time: 1734578015467548904 (sec:1734578015.4675)
> >> delta to HW Launch-time sec:1.0000 (1000000.000 usec)
> >> 0x562ff5dc8880: complete tx idx=4 addr=4018
> >> HW Launch-time: 1734578016467548904 (sec:1734578016.4675)
> >> delta to HW TX-complete-time sec:0.0000 (0.016 usec)
> >> HW TX-complete-time: 1734578016467548920 (sec:1734578016.4675)
> >> delta to User TX-complete-time sec:0.0000
> >> (32.546 usec)
> >> XDP RX-time: 1734578015467651698 (sec:1734578015.4677)
> >> delta to User TX-complete-time sec:0.9999
> >> (999929.768 usec)
> >> HW RX-time: 1734578015467548904 (sec:1734578015.4675)
> >> delta to HW TX-complete-time sec:1.0000 (1000000.016 usec)
> >> 0x562ff5dc8880: complete rx idx=132 addr=84110
> >>
> >> Test 2: Send 1000 packets with a 10 ms interval and the launch time set to
> >> 500 us in the future.
> >>
> >> Test steps:
> >> 1. On the DUT, start the xdp_hw_metadata selftest application:
> >> $ sudo chrt -f 99 ./xdp_hw_metadata enp2s0 -l 500000 -L 1 > \
> >> /dev/shm/result.log
> >>
> >> 2. On the Link Partner, send 1000 UDP packets with a 10 ms interval and
> >> VLAN priority 1 to port 9091 of the DUT.
> >>
> >> Result:
> >> When the launch time is set to 500 us in the future, the average delta
> >> between the launch time and the transmit hardware timestamp is 0.016 us,
> >> as shown in the analysis of /dev/shm/result.log below. The XDP launch time
> >> works correctly in sending 1000 packets continuously.
> >> Min delta: 0.005 us
> >> Avr delta: 0.016 us
> >> Max delta: 0.031 us
> >> Total packets forwarded: 1000
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Song Yoong Siang <yoong.siang.s...@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++--
> >> 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
> >b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
> >> index c3edd8bcf633..535d340c71c9 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igc/igc_main.c
> >> @@ -2951,9 +2951,33 @@ static u64 igc_xsk_fill_timestamp(void *_priv)
> >> return *(u64 *)_priv;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static void igc_xsk_request_launch_time(u64 launch_time, void *_priv)
> >> +{
> >> + struct igc_metadata_request *meta_req = _priv;
> >> + struct igc_ring *tx_ring = meta_req->tx_ring;
> >> + __le32 launch_time_offset;
> >> + bool insert_empty = false;
> >> + bool first_flag = false;
> >> +
> >> + if (!tx_ring->launchtime_enable)
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + launch_time_offset = igc_tx_launchtime(tx_ring,
> >> + ns_to_ktime(launch_time),
> >> + &first_flag, &insert_empty);
> >> + if (insert_empty) {
> >> + igc_insert_empty_packet(tx_ring);
> >> + meta_req->tx_buffer =
> >> + &tx_ring->tx_buffer_info[tx_ring->next_to_use];
> >
> >in this case I think you currently are leaking the skbs and dma mappings
> >that igc_init_empty_frame() did. you're going to mix
> >IGC_TX_BUFFER_TYPE_XSK with IGC_TX_BUFFER_TYPE_SKB and the latter is not
> >explicitly initialized. Even though IGC_TX_BUFFER_TYPE_SKB happens to be
> >equal to 0, igc_tx_buffer::type is never cleared in the tx clean desc
> >routine.
> >
>
> Hi Fijalkowski Maciej,
>
> Thanks for your inputs.
>
> Yes, you are right, IGC_TX_BUFFER_TYPE_SKB is mixed together with
> IGC_TX_BUFFER_TYPE_XSK. Regarding the skb and dma map,
> following code in igc_clean_tx_irq() will free the skb and unmap the dma,
> Do these answer your concern on leaking?
>
> igc_main.c:3133: case IGC_TX_BUFFER_TYPE_SKB:
> igc_main.c-3134- napi_consume_skb(tx_buffer->skb,
> napi_budget);
> igc_main.c-3135- igc_unmap_tx_buffer(tx_ring->dev,
> tx_buffer);
> igc_main.c-3136- break;
>
> Regarding the igc_tx_buffer::type never cleared, I think the
> important thing is making the igc_tx_buffer::next_to_watch NULL
> to indicate no remaining packet. Since transmit function will
> always set the igc_tx_buffer::type to a proper type,
igc_init_tx_empty_descriptor() does not set ::type, that was my point. So
these empty descs might be treated as IGC_TX_BUFFER_TYPE_XSK, which is
wrong and your qouted code above will never get called. You will then leak
skb and dma map plus you will confuse XSK code due to xsk_frames miscount.
> I think it is optional for us to clear it.
> Is that make sense to you?
>
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + igc_tx_ctxtdesc(tx_ring, launch_time_offset, first_flag, 0, 0, 0);
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> const struct xsk_tx_metadata_ops igc_xsk_tx_metadata_ops = {
> >> .tmo_request_timestamp = igc_xsk_request_timestamp,
> >> .tmo_fill_timestamp = igc_xsk_fill_timestamp,
> >> + .tmo_request_launch_time = igc_xsk_request_launch_time,
> >> };
> >>
> >> static void igc_xdp_xmit_zc(struct igc_ring *ring)
> >> @@ -2976,7 +3000,13 @@ static void igc_xdp_xmit_zc(struct igc_ring *ring)
> >> ntu = ring->next_to_use;
> >> budget = igc_desc_unused(ring);
> >>
> >> - while (xsk_tx_peek_desc(pool, &xdp_desc) && budget--) {
> >> + /* Packets with launch time require one data descriptor and one context
> >> + * descriptor. When the launch time falls into the next Qbv cycle, we
> >> + * may need to insert an empty packet, which requires two more
> >> + * descriptors. Therefore, to be safe, we always ensure we have at least
> >> + * 4 descriptors available.
> >> + */
> >> + while (xsk_tx_peek_desc(pool, &xdp_desc) && budget >= 4) {
> >> struct igc_metadata_request meta_req;
> >> struct xsk_tx_metadata *meta = NULL;
> >> struct igc_tx_buffer *bi;
> >> @@ -3000,6 +3030,12 @@ static void igc_xdp_xmit_zc(struct igc_ring *ring)
> >> xsk_tx_metadata_request(meta, &igc_xsk_tx_metadata_ops,
> >> &meta_req);
> >>
> >> + /* xsk_tx_metadata_request() may have updated next_to_use */
> >> + ntu = ring->next_to_use;
> >> +
> >> + /* xsk_tx_metadata_request() may have updated Tx buffer info */
> >> + bi = meta_req.tx_buffer;
> >> +
> >> tx_desc = IGC_TX_DESC(ring, ntu);
> >> tx_desc->read.cmd_type_len = cpu_to_le32(meta_req.cmd_type);
> >> tx_desc->read.olinfo_status = cpu_to_le32(olinfo_status);
> >> @@ -3017,9 +3053,11 @@ static void igc_xdp_xmit_zc(struct igc_ring *ring)
> >> ntu++;
> >> if (ntu == ring->count)
> >> ntu = 0;
> >> +
> >> + ring->next_to_use = ntu;
> >> + budget = igc_desc_unused(ring);
> >
> >why count the remaining space in loop? couldn't you decrement it
> >accordingly to the count of descriptors you have produced? writing ntu
> >back and forth between local var and ring struct performance-wise does not
> >look fine.
> >
>
> Yes, I can check the number of used descriptor in xsk_tx_metadata_request()
> by introducing a new field named used_desc in struct igc_metadata_request,
> and then decreases the budget with it.
>
> Do this way looked good to you?
Yes this makes sense to me, thanks!
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Siang
>
> >> }
> >>
> >> - ring->next_to_use = ntu;
> >> if (tx_desc) {
> >> igc_flush_tx_descriptors(ring);
> >> xsk_tx_release(pool);
> >> --
> >> 2.34.1
> >>
