On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 3:00 AM Samudrala, Sridhar
<sridhar.samudr...@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 6/22/2020 6:21 AM, Magnus Karlsson wrote:
> > Improve the performance of the AF_XDP zero-copy Tx completion
> > path. When there are no XDP buffers being sent using XDP_TX or
> > XDP_REDIRECT, we do not have go through the SW ring to clean up any
> > entries since the AF_XDP path does not use these. In these cases, just
> > fast forward the next-to-use counter and skip going through the SW
> > ring. The limit on the maximum number of entries to complete is also
> > removed since the algorithm is now O(1). To simplify the code path, the
> > maximum number of entries to complete for the XDP path is therefore
> > also increased from 256 to 512 (the default number of Tx HW
> > descriptors). This should be fine since the completion in the XDP path
> > is faster than in the SKB path that has 256 as the maximum number.
> >
> > This patch provides around 4% throughput improvement for the l2fwd
> > application in xdpsock on my machine.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karls...@intel.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c | 1 +
> > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.h | 1 +
> > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_xsk.c | 34
> > ++++++++++++++++-------------
> > 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c
> > index f9555c8..0ce9d1e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c
> > @@ -3538,6 +3538,7 @@ static int i40e_xmit_xdp_ring(struct xdp_frame *xdpf,
> > */
> > smp_wmb();
> >
> > + xdp_ring->xdp_tx_active++;
> > i++;
> > if (i == xdp_ring->count)
> > i = 0;
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.h
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.h
> > index 5c25597..c16fcd9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.h
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.h
> > @@ -371,6 +371,7 @@ struct i40e_ring {
> > /* used in interrupt processing */
> > u16 next_to_use;
> > u16 next_to_clean;
> > + u16 xdp_tx_active;
> >
> > u8 atr_sample_rate;
> > u8 atr_count;
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_xsk.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_xsk.c
> > index 7276580..c8cd6a6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_xsk.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_xsk.c
> > @@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ int i40e_clean_rx_irq_zc(struct i40e_ring *rx_ring, int
> > budget)
> > **/
> > static bool i40e_xmit_zc(struct i40e_ring *xdp_ring, unsigned int budget)
> > {
> > + unsigned int sent_frames = 0, total_bytes = 0;
> > struct i40e_tx_desc *tx_desc = NULL;
> > struct i40e_tx_buffer *tx_bi;
> > bool work_done = true;
> > @@ -408,6 +409,9 @@ static bool i40e_xmit_zc(struct i40e_ring *xdp_ring,
> > unsigned int budget)
> > | I40E_TX_DESC_CMD_EOP,
> > 0, desc.len, 0);
> >
> > + sent_frames++;
> > + total_bytes += tx_bi->bytecount;
> > +
> > xdp_ring->next_to_use++;
> > if (xdp_ring->next_to_use == xdp_ring->count)
> > xdp_ring->next_to_use = 0;
> > @@ -420,6 +424,7 @@ static bool i40e_xmit_zc(struct i40e_ring *xdp_ring,
> > unsigned int budget)
> > i40e_xdp_ring_update_tail(xdp_ring);
> >
> > xsk_umem_consume_tx_done(xdp_ring->xsk_umem);
> > + i40e_update_tx_stats(xdp_ring, sent_frames, total_bytes);
> > }
> >
> > return !!budget && work_done;
> > @@ -434,6 +439,7 @@ static void i40e_clean_xdp_tx_buffer(struct i40e_ring
> > *tx_ring,
> > struct i40e_tx_buffer *tx_bi)
> > {
> > xdp_return_frame(tx_bi->xdpf);
> > + tx_ring->xdp_tx_active--;
> > dma_unmap_single(tx_ring->dev,
> > dma_unmap_addr(tx_bi, dma),
> > dma_unmap_len(tx_bi, len), DMA_TO_DEVICE);
> > @@ -450,24 +456,23 @@ static void i40e_clean_xdp_tx_buffer(struct i40e_ring
> > *tx_ring,
> > bool i40e_clean_xdp_tx_irq(struct i40e_vsi *vsi,
> > struct i40e_ring *tx_ring, int napi_budget)
>
> napi_budget is not used. so the 3rd arg can be removed
Thanks Sridhar. You are correct on all accounts in this mail. Will fix
and send a v2.
/Magnus
> > {
> > - unsigned int ntc, total_bytes = 0, budget = vsi->work_limit;
> > - u32 i, completed_frames, frames_ready, xsk_frames = 0;
> > + unsigned int ntc, budget = vsi->work_limit;
> > struct xdp_umem *umem = tx_ring->xsk_umem;
> > + u32 i, completed_frames, xsk_frames = 0;
> > u32 head_idx = i40e_get_head(tx_ring);
> > bool work_done = true, xmit_done;
>
> work_done is no longer required
>
> > struct i40e_tx_buffer *tx_bi;
> >
> > if (head_idx < tx_ring->next_to_clean)
> > head_idx += tx_ring->count;
> > - frames_ready = head_idx - tx_ring->next_to_clean;
> > + completed_frames = head_idx - tx_ring->next_to_clean;
> >
> > - if (frames_ready == 0) {
> > + if (completed_frames == 0)
> > goto out_xmit;
> > - } else if (frames_ready > budget) {
> > - completed_frames = budget;
> > - work_done = false;
> > - } else {
> > - completed_frames = frames_ready;
> > +
> > + if (likely(!tx_ring->xdp_tx_active)) {
> > + xsk_frames = completed_frames;
> > + goto skip;
> > }
> >
> > ntc = tx_ring->next_to_clean;
> > @@ -475,18 +480,18 @@ bool i40e_clean_xdp_tx_irq(struct i40e_vsi *vsi,
> > for (i = 0; i < completed_frames; i++) {
> > tx_bi = &tx_ring->tx_bi[ntc];
> >
> > - if (tx_bi->xdpf)
> > + if (tx_bi->xdpf) {
> > i40e_clean_xdp_tx_buffer(tx_ring, tx_bi);
> > - else
> > + tx_bi->xdpf = NULL;
> > + } else {
> > xsk_frames++;
> > -
> > - tx_bi->xdpf = NULL;
> > - total_bytes += tx_bi->bytecount;
> > + }
> >
> > if (++ntc >= tx_ring->count)
> > ntc = 0;
> > }
> >
> > +skip:
> > tx_ring->next_to_clean += completed_frames;
> > if (unlikely(tx_ring->next_to_clean >= tx_ring->count))
> > tx_ring->next_to_clean -= tx_ring->count;
> > @@ -495,7 +500,6 @@ bool i40e_clean_xdp_tx_irq(struct i40e_vsi *vsi,
> > xsk_umem_complete_tx(umem, xsk_frames);
> >
> > i40e_arm_wb(tx_ring, vsi, budget);
>
> I guess budget here should be replaced with completed_frames
>
> > - i40e_update_tx_stats(tx_ring, completed_frames, total_bytes);
> >
> > out_xmit:
> > if (xsk_umem_uses_need_wakeup(tx_ring->xsk_umem))
>
>
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Intel-wired-lan mailing list
> intel-wired-...@osuosl.org
> https://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-wired-lan
