On 13.08.2021 11:46, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:

j

On Fri, Aug 13, 2021 at 3:39 AM Heiner Kallweit [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On 12.08.2021 17:53, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:

quoted

r8169 NICs on some platforms have abysmal speed when ASPM is enabled.
Same issue can be observed with older vendor drivers.

The issue is however solved by the latest vendor driver. There's a new
mechanism, which disables r8169's internal ASPM when the NIC traffic has
more than 10 packets, and vice versa.

Realtek confirmed that all their PCIe LAN NICs, r8106, r8168 and r8125
use dynamic ASPM under Windows. So implement the same mechanism here to
resolve the issue.

Realtek using something in their Windows drivers isn't really a proof of
quality.

I agree. So it'll be great if Realtek can work with us here.

quoted

Still my concerns haven't been addressed. If ASPM is enabled and
there's a congestion in the chip it may take up to a second until ASPM
gets disabled. In this second traffic very likely is heavily affected.
Who takes care in case of problem reports?

I think we'll know that once the patch is merged in downstream kernel.

quoted

This is a massive change for basically all chip versions. And experience
shows that in case of problem reports Realtek never cares, even though
they are listed as maintainers. All I see is that they copy more and more
code from r8169 into their own drivers. This seems to indicate that they
consider quality of their own drivers as not sufficient.

I wonder why they don't want to put their efforts to r8169...
Obviously they are doing a great job for rtw88 and r8152.

quoted

Still my proposal: Apply this downstream, and if there are no complaints
after a few months it may be considered for mainline.

Yes that's my plan. But I'd still like it to be reviewed before
putting it to the downstream kernel.

quoted

Last but not least the formal issues:
- no cover letter

Will write it up once it's tested dowstream.

quoted

- no net/net-next annotation

Does it mean put "net/net-next" in the subject line?

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/networking/netdev-FAQ.html#how-do-i-indicate-which-tree-net-vs-net-next-my-patch-should-be-in

quoted

quoted

Signed-off-by: Kai-Heng Feng <redacted>
---
v2:
 - Use delayed_work instead of timer_list to avoid interrupt context
 - Use mutex to serialize packet counter read/write
 - Wording change

 drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c
index c7af5bc3b8af..7ab2e841dc69 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c

@@ -624,6 +624,11 @@ struct rtl8169_private {

      unsigned supports_gmii:1;
      unsigned aspm_manageable:1;
+     unsigned aspm_enabled:1;
+     struct delayed_work aspm_toggle;
+     struct mutex aspm_mutex;
+     u32 aspm_packet_count;
+
      dma_addr_t counters_phys_addr;
      struct rtl8169_counters *counters;
      struct rtl8169_tc_offsets tc_offset;

@@ -2671,6 +2676,8 @@ static void rtl_hw_aspm_clkreq_enable(struct rtl8169_private *tp, bool enable)
              RTL_W8(tp, Config5, RTL_R8(tp, Config5) & ~ASPM_en);
      }

+     tp->aspm_enabled = enable;
+
      udelay(10);
 }

@@ -4408,6 +4415,9 @@ static void rtl_tx(struct net_device *dev, struct rtl8169_private *tp,

      dirty_tx = tp->dirty_tx;

+     mutex_lock(&tp->aspm_mutex);

We are in soft irq context here, therefore you shouldn't sleep.

I thought napi_poll is not using softirq, apparent I was wrong. Will
correct it too.

I saw an automated mail from a test bot to you complaining about this.

quoted

quoted

+     tp->aspm_packet_count += tp->cur_tx - dirty_tx;
+     mutex_unlock(&tp->aspm_mutex);
      while (READ_ONCE(tp->cur_tx) != dirty_tx) {
              unsigned int entry = dirty_tx % NUM_TX_DESC;
              u32 status;

@@ -4552,6 +4562,10 @@ static int rtl_rx(struct net_device *dev, struct rtl8169_private *tp, int budget
              rtl8169_mark_to_asic(desc);
      }

+     mutex_lock(&tp->aspm_mutex);
+     tp->aspm_packet_count += count;
+     mutex_unlock(&tp->aspm_mutex);
+
      return count;
 }

@@ -4659,8 +4673,33 @@ static int r8169_phy_connect(struct rtl8169_private *tp)
      return 0;
 }

+#define ASPM_PACKET_THRESHOLD 10
+#define ASPM_TOGGLE_INTERVAL 1000
+
+static void rtl8169_aspm_toggle(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+     struct rtl8169_private *tp = container_of(work, struct rtl8169_private,
+                                               aspm_toggle.work);
+     bool enable;
+
+     mutex_lock(&tp->aspm_mutex);
+     enable = tp->aspm_packet_count <= ASPM_PACKET_THRESHOLD;
+     tp->aspm_packet_count = 0;
+     mutex_unlock(&tp->aspm_mutex);
+
+     if (tp->aspm_enabled != enable) {
+             rtl_unlock_config_regs(tp);
+             rtl_hw_aspm_clkreq_enable(tp, enable);
+             rtl_lock_config_regs(tp);
+     }
+
+     schedule_delayed_work(&tp->aspm_toggle, ASPM_TOGGLE_INTERVAL);
+}
+
 static void rtl8169_down(struct rtl8169_private *tp)
 {
+     cancel_delayed_work_sync(&tp->aspm_toggle);
+
      /* Clear all task flags */
      bitmap_zero(tp->wk.flags, RTL_FLAG_MAX);

@@ -4687,6 +4726,8 @@ static void rtl8169_up(struct rtl8169_private *tp)
      rtl_reset_work(tp);

      phy_start(tp->phydev);
+
+     schedule_delayed_work(&tp->aspm_toggle, ASPM_TOGGLE_INTERVAL);

In the first version you used msecs_to_jiffies(ASPM_TIMER_INTERVAL).
Now you use 1000 jiffies what is a major difference.

msecs_to_jiffies() was omitted. Will correct it.

Kai-Heng

quoted

quoted

 }

 static int rtl8169_close(struct net_device *dev)

@@ -5347,6 +5388,10 @@ static int rtl_init_one(struct pci_dev *pdev, const struct pci_device_id *ent)

      INIT_WORK(&tp->wk.work, rtl_task);

+     INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&tp->aspm_toggle, rtl8169_aspm_toggle);
+
+     mutex_init(&tp->aspm_mutex);
+
      rtl_init_mac_address(tp);

      dev->ethtool_ops = &rtl8169_ethtool_ops;