From: Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
To: Mateusz Polchlopek <mateusz.polchlopek@intel.com>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
edumazet@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Michal Wilczynski <michal.wilczynski@intel.com>,
corbet@lwn.net, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 6/6] ice: Document tx_scheduling_layers parameter
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 17:47:15 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f759d33f-860c-454b-8553-3b840ed6da8d@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <263b96d6-692e-4e2b-87dd-cf70a8818cbb@intel.com>
On 4/24/24 16:54, Mateusz Polchlopek wrote:
>
>
> On 4/23/2024 2:37 PM, Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 01:39:11PM -0700, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>>> + The default 9-layer tree topology was deemed best for most workloads,
>>> + as it gives an optimal ratio of performance to configurability. However,
>>> + for some specific cases, this 9-layer topology might not be desired.
>>> + One example would be sending traffic to queues that are not a multiple
>>> + of 8. Because the maximum radix is limited to 8 in 9-layer topology,
>>> + the 9th queue has a different parent than the rest, and it's given
>>> + more bandwidth credits. This causes a problem when the system is
>>> + sending traffic to 9 queues:
>>> +
>>> + | tx_queue_0_packets: 24163396
>>> + | tx_queue_1_packets: 24164623
>>> + | tx_queue_2_packets: 24163188
>>> + | tx_queue_3_packets: 24163701
>>> + | tx_queue_4_packets: 24163683
>>> + | tx_queue_5_packets: 24164668
>>> + | tx_queue_6_packets: 23327200
>>> + | tx_queue_7_packets: 24163853
>>> + | tx_queue_8_packets: 91101417 < Too much traffic is sent from 9th
>>> +
>>> <snipped>...
>>> + To verify that value has been set:
>>> + $ devlink dev param show pci/0000:16:00.0 name tx_scheduling_layers
>>>
>>
>> For consistency with other code blocks, format above as such:
>>
>> ---- >8 ----
>> diff --git a/Documentation/networking/devlink/ice.rst b/Documentation/networking/devlink/ice.rst
>> index 830c04354222f8..0039ca45782400 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/networking/devlink/ice.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/networking/devlink/ice.rst
>> @@ -41,15 +41,17 @@ Parameters
>> more bandwidth credits. This causes a problem when the system is
>> sending traffic to 9 queues:
>> - | tx_queue_0_packets: 24163396
>> - | tx_queue_1_packets: 24164623
>> - | tx_queue_2_packets: 24163188
>> - | tx_queue_3_packets: 24163701
>> - | tx_queue_4_packets: 24163683
>> - | tx_queue_5_packets: 24164668
>> - | tx_queue_6_packets: 23327200
>> - | tx_queue_7_packets: 24163853
>> - | tx_queue_8_packets: 91101417 < Too much traffic is sent from 9th
>> + .. code-block:: shell
>> +
>> + tx_queue_0_packets: 24163396
>> + tx_queue_1_packets: 24164623
>> + tx_queue_2_packets: 24163188
>> + tx_queue_3_packets: 24163701
>> + tx_queue_4_packets: 24163683
>> + tx_queue_5_packets: 24164668
>> + tx_queue_6_packets: 23327200
>> + tx_queue_7_packets: 24163853
>> + tx_queue_8_packets: 91101417 < Too much traffic is sent from 9th
>> To address this need, you can switch to a 5-layer topology, which
>> changes the maximum topology radix to 512. With this enhancement,
>> @@ -67,7 +69,10 @@ Parameters
>> You must do PCI slot powercycle for the selected topology to take effect.
>> To verify that value has been set:
>> - $ devlink dev param show pci/0000:16:00.0 name tx_scheduling_layers
>> +
>> + .. code-block:: shell
>> +
>> + $ devlink dev param show pci/0000:16:00.0 name tx_scheduling_layers
>> Info versions
>> =============
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>
> Thank You for reporting that. I will verify this issue soon.
OK, thanks!
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-24 10:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20240422203913.225151-1-anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>
2024-04-22 20:39 ` [PATCH net-next 6/6] ice: Document tx_scheduling_layers parameter Tony Nguyen
2024-04-23 12:37 ` Bagas Sanjaya
2024-04-24 9:54 ` Mateusz Polchlopek
2024-04-24 10:47 ` Bagas Sanjaya [this message]
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=f759d33f-860c-454b-8553-3b840ed6da8d@gmail.com \
--to=bagasdotme@gmail.com \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jiri@nvidia.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mateusz.polchlopek@intel.com \
--cc=michal.wilczynski@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@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).