On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 05:04:47PM +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:47:46 +0200
Ilias Apalodimas [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 03:41:23PM +0000, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
quoted
From: Matteo Croce <redacted>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2021 18:02:55 +0100
quoted
From: Matteo Croce <redacted>
This series enables recycling of the buffers allocated with the page_pool API.
The first two patches are just prerequisite to save space in a struct and
avoid recycling pages allocated with other API.
Patch 2 was based on a previous idea from Jonathan Lemon.
The third one is the real recycling, 4 fixes the compilation of __skb_frag_unref
users, and 5,6 enable the recycling on two drivers.
In the last two patches I reported the improvement I have with the series.
The recycling as is can't be used with drivers like mlx5 which do page split,
but this is documented in a comment.
In the future, a refcount can be used so to support mlx5 with no changes.
Ilias Apalodimas (2):
page_pool: DMA handling and allow to recycles frames via SKB
net: change users of __skb_frag_unref() and add an extra argument
Jesper Dangaard Brouer (1):
xdp: reduce size of struct xdp_mem_info
Matteo Croce (3):
mm: add a signature in struct page
mvpp2: recycle buffers
mvneta: recycle buffers
.../chelsio/inline_crypto/ch_ktls/chcr_ktls.c | 2 +-
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c | 4 +-
.../net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c | 17 +++----
drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/sky2.c | 2 +-
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c | 2 +-
include/linux/mm_types.h | 1 +
include/linux/skbuff.h | 33 +++++++++++--
include/net/page_pool.h | 15 ++++++
include/net/xdp.h | 5 +-
net/core/page_pool.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++
net/core/skbuff.c | 20 +++++++-
net/core/xdp.c | 14 ++++--
net/tls/tls_device.c | 2 +-
13 files changed, 138 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
Just for the reference, I've performed some tests on 1G SoC NIC with
this patchset on, here's direct link: [0]
Thanks for the testing!
Any chance you can get a perf measurement on this?
I guess you mean perf-report (--stdio) output, right?
Yea,
As hinted below, I am just trying to figure out if on Alexander's platform the
cost of syncing, is bigger that free-allocate. I remember one armv7 were that
was the case.
quoted
Is DMA syncing taking a substantial amount of your cpu usage?
(+1 this is an important question)
quoted
quoted
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20210323153550.130385-1-alobakin@pm.me (local)
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer