> From: Heng Qi <hengqi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2024 11:57 PM
> To: Dan Jurgens <danielj@xxxxxxxxxx>; netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: mst@xxxxxxxxxx; jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx; xuanzhuo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; Jiri Pirko
> <jiri@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 4/6] virtio_net: Do DIM update for specified
> queue only
>
>
>
> 在 2024/3/28 下午12:47, Daniel Jurgens 写道:
> > Since we no longer have to hold the RTNL lock here just do updates for
> > the specified queue.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Jurgens <danielj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 38 ++++++++++++++------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c index
> > b9298544b1b5..9c4bfb1eb15c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > @@ -3596,36 +3596,26 @@ static void virtnet_rx_dim_work(struct
> work_struct *work)
> > struct virtnet_info *vi = rq->vq->vdev->priv;
> > struct net_device *dev = vi->dev;
> > struct dim_cq_moder update_moder;
> > - int i, qnum, err;
> > + int qnum, err;
> >
> > if (!rtnl_trylock())
> > return;
> >
> > - /* Each rxq's work is queued by "net_dim()->schedule_work()"
> > - * in response to NAPI traffic changes. Note that dim->profile_ix
> > - * for each rxq is updated prior to the queuing action.
> > - * So we only need to traverse and update profiles for all rxqs
> > - * in the work which is holding rtnl_lock.
> > - */
> > - for (i = 0; i < vi->curr_queue_pairs; i++) {
> > - rq = &vi->rq[i];
> > - dim = &rq->dim;
> > - qnum = rq - vi->rq;
> > + qnum = rq - vi->rq;
> >
> > - if (!rq->dim_enabled)
> > - continue;
> > + if (!rq->dim_enabled)
> > + continue;
>
> ?
>
> continue what?
>
Sorry, messed this up when I was testing the patches and put the fix for the continue in the lock patch.
> For the lock code, please pass the test. It's important.
I did some bench testing. I'll do more and send a new set early next week.
>
> Regards,
> Heng
>
> >
> > - update_moder = net_dim_get_rx_moderation(dim->mode,
> dim->profile_ix);
> > - if (update_moder.usec != rq->intr_coal.max_usecs ||
> > - update_moder.pkts != rq->intr_coal.max_packets) {
> > - err = virtnet_send_rx_ctrl_coal_vq_cmd(vi, qnum,
> > -
> update_moder.usec,
> > -
> update_moder.pkts);
> > - if (err)
> > - pr_debug("%s: Failed to send dim
> parameters on rxq%d\n",
> > - dev->name, qnum);
> > - dim->state = DIM_START_MEASURE;
> > - }
> > + update_moder = net_dim_get_rx_moderation(dim->mode, dim-
> >profile_ix);
> > + if (update_moder.usec != rq->intr_coal.max_usecs ||
> > + update_moder.pkts != rq->intr_coal.max_packets) {
> > + err = virtnet_send_rx_ctrl_coal_vq_cmd(vi, qnum,
> > + update_moder.usec,
> > + update_moder.pkts);
> > + if (err)
> > + pr_debug("%s: Failed to send dim parameters on
> rxq%d\n",
> > + dev->name, qnum);
> > + dim->state = DIM_START_MEASURE;
> > }
> >
> > rtnl_unlock();
