From: "Loftus, Ciara" <ciara.loftus@intel.com>
To: "Du, Frank" <frank.du@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/af_xdp: fix umem map size for zero copy
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:22:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <MW4PR11MB587251A8C54D8F13B79F539A8E1A2@MW4PR11MB5872.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <PH0PR11MB4775D5A2BFDEF110F563FBAD80142@PH0PR11MB4775.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
> >
> > > Subject: [PATCH] net/af_xdp: fix umem map size for zero copy
> > >
> > > The current calculation assumes that the mbufs are contiguous.
> > > However, this assumption is incorrect when the memory spans across a
> huge
> > page.
> > > Correct to directly read the size from the mempool memory chunks.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Frank Du <frank.du@intel.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 10 +++++-----
> > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > > b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > > index 268a130c49..cb95d17d13 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > > @@ -1039,7 +1039,7 @@ eth_link_update(struct rte_eth_dev *dev
> > > __rte_unused, }
> > >
> > > #if defined(XDP_UMEM_UNALIGNED_CHUNK_FLAG)
> > > -static inline uintptr_t get_base_addr(struct rte_mempool *mp,
> > > uint64_t
> > > *align)
> > > +static inline uintptr_t get_memhdr_info(struct rte_mempool *mp,
> > > +uint64_t
> > > *align, size_t *len)
> > > {
> > > struct rte_mempool_memhdr *memhdr;
> > > uintptr_t memhdr_addr, aligned_addr; @@ -1048,6 +1048,7 @@
> static
> > > inline uintptr_t get_base_addr(struct rte_mempool *mp, uint64_t
> > > *align)
> > > memhdr_addr = (uintptr_t)memhdr->addr;
> > > aligned_addr = memhdr_addr & ~(getpagesize() - 1);
> > > *align = memhdr_addr - aligned_addr;
> > > + *len = memhdr->len;
> > >
> > > return aligned_addr;
> > > }
> > > @@ -1125,6 +1126,7 @@ xsk_umem_info *xdp_umem_configure(struct
> > > pmd_internals *internals,
> > > void *base_addr = NULL;
> > > struct rte_mempool *mb_pool = rxq->mb_pool;
> > > uint64_t umem_size, align = 0;
> > > + size_t len = 0;
> > >
> > > if (internals->shared_umem) {
> > > if (get_shared_umem(rxq, internals->if_name, &umem) < 0)
> @@
> > > -1156,10 +1158,8 @@ xsk_umem_info *xdp_umem_configure(struct
> > > pmd_internals *internals,
> > > }
> > >
> > > umem->mb_pool = mb_pool;
> > > - base_addr = (void *)get_base_addr(mb_pool, &align);
> > > - umem_size = (uint64_t)mb_pool->populated_size *
> > > - (uint64_t)usr_config.frame_size +
> > > - align;
> > > + base_addr = (void *)get_memhdr_info(mb_pool, &align,
> > > &len);
> > > + umem_size = (uint64_t)len + align;
> >
> > len is set to the length of the first memhdr of the mempool. There may be
> many
> > other memhdrs in the mempool. So I don't think this is the correct value to
> use for
> > calculating the entire umem size.
>
> Current each xdp rx ring is bonded to one single umem region, it can't reuse
> the memory
> if there are multiple memhdrs in the mempool. How about adding a check on
> the number
> of the memory chunks to only allow one single memhdr mempool can be used
> here?
The UMEM needs to be a region of virtual contiguous memory. I think this can still be the case, even if the mempool has multiple memhdrs.
If we detect >1 memhdrs perhaps we need to verify that the RTE_MEMPOOL_F_NO_IOVA_CONTIG flag is not set which I think would mean that the mempool may not be virtually contiguous.
>
> >
> > >
> > > ret = xsk_umem__create(&umem->umem, base_addr,
> > umem_size,
> > > &rxq->fq, &rxq->cq, &usr_config);
> > > --
> > > 2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-30 9:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-26 0:51 [PATCH] net/af_xdp: fix umem map size for zero copy Frank Du
2024-04-26 10:43 ` Loftus, Ciara
2024-04-28 0:46 ` Du, Frank
2024-04-30 9:22 ` Loftus, Ciara [this message]
2024-05-11 5:26 ` [PATCH v2] " Frank Du
2024-05-17 13:19 ` Loftus, Ciara
2024-05-20 1:28 ` Du, Frank
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=MW4PR11MB587251A8C54D8F13B79F539A8E1A2@MW4PR11MB5872.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=ciara.loftus@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=frank.du@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).