Re: [PATCH net-next v6 05/10] virtio_net: xsk: bind/unbind xsk for rx
On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 10:19:34 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 3:57 PM Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> >
> > This patch implement the logic of bind/unbind xsk pool to rq.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xuan Zhuo
> > ---
> > drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 133 +++
> > 1 file changed, 133 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > index df885cdbe658..d8cce143be26 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> > #include
> > #include
> > #include
> > +#include
> >
> > static int napi_weight = NAPI_POLL_WEIGHT;
> > module_param(napi_weight, int, 0444);
> > @@ -348,6 +349,13 @@ struct receive_queue {
> >
> > /* Record the last dma info to free after new pages is allocated. */
> > struct virtnet_rq_dma *last_dma;
> > +
> > + struct {
> > + struct xsk_buff_pool *pool;
> > +
> > + /* xdp rxq used by xsk */
> > + struct xdp_rxq_info xdp_rxq;
> > + } xsk;
>
> I don't see a special reason for having a container struct here.
Will fix.
>
>
> > };
> >
> > /* This structure can contain rss message with maximum settings for
> > indirection table and keysize
> > @@ -4970,6 +4978,129 @@ static int virtnet_restore_guest_offloads(struct
> > virtnet_info *vi)
> > return virtnet_set_guest_offloads(vi, offloads);
> > }
> >
> > +static int virtnet_rq_bind_xsk_pool(struct virtnet_info *vi, struct
> > receive_queue *rq,
> > + struct xsk_buff_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > + int err, qindex;
> > +
> > + qindex = rq - vi->rq;
> > +
> > + if (pool) {
> > + err = xdp_rxq_info_reg(&rq->xsk.xdp_rxq, vi->dev, qindex,
> > rq->napi.napi_id);
> > + if (err < 0)
> > + return err;
> > +
> > + err = xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(&rq->xsk.xdp_rxq,
> > +MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL,
> > NULL);
> > + if (err < 0)
> > + goto unreg;
> > +
> > + xsk_pool_set_rxq_info(pool, &rq->xsk.xdp_rxq);
> > + }
> > +
> > + virtnet_rx_pause(vi, rq);
> > +
> > + err = virtqueue_reset(rq->vq, virtnet_rq_unmap_free_buf);
> > + if (err) {
> > + netdev_err(vi->dev, "reset rx fail: rx queue index: %d err:
> > %d\n", qindex, err);
> > +
> > + pool = NULL;
> > + }
> > +
> > + rq->xsk.pool = pool;
> > +
> > + virtnet_rx_resume(vi, rq);
> > +
> > + if (pool)
> > + return 0;
> > +
> > +unreg:
> > + xdp_rxq_info_unreg(&rq->xsk.xdp_rxq);
> > + return err;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int virtnet_xsk_pool_enable(struct net_device *dev,
> > + struct xsk_buff_pool *pool,
> > + u16 qid)
> > +{
> > + struct virtnet_info *vi = netdev_priv(dev);
> > + struct receive_queue *rq;
> > + struct device *dma_dev;
> > + struct send_queue *sq;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + /* In big_packets mode, xdp cannot work, so there is no need to
> > +* initialize xsk of rq.
> > +*/
> > + if (vi->big_packets && !vi->mergeable_rx_bufs)
> > + return -ENOENT;
> > +
> > + if (qid >= vi->curr_queue_pairs)
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > + sq = &vi->sq[qid];
> > + rq = &vi->rq[qid];
> > +
> > + /* For the xsk, the tx and rx should have the same device. The
> > af-xdp
> > +* may use one buffer to receive from the rx and reuse this buffer
> > to
> > +* send by the tx. So the dma dev of sq and rq should be the same
> > one.
> > +*
> > +* But vq->dma_dev allows every vq has the respective dma dev. So I
> > +* check the dma dev of vq and sq is the same dev.
>
> Not a native speaker, but it might be better to say "xsk assumes
> to be the same device". And it might be better to replace "should"
> with "must".
Will fix.
Thanks.
>
> Others look good.
>
> Thanks
>
Re: [PATCH net-next v6 05/10] virtio_net: xsk: bind/unbind xsk for rx
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 3:57 PM Xuan Zhuo wrote:
>
> This patch implement the logic of bind/unbind xsk pool to rq.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xuan Zhuo
> ---
> drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 133 +++
> 1 file changed, 133 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> index df885cdbe658..d8cce143be26 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> #include
> #include
> #include
> +#include
>
> static int napi_weight = NAPI_POLL_WEIGHT;
> module_param(napi_weight, int, 0444);
> @@ -348,6 +349,13 @@ struct receive_queue {
>
> /* Record the last dma info to free after new pages is allocated. */
> struct virtnet_rq_dma *last_dma;
> +
> + struct {
> + struct xsk_buff_pool *pool;
> +
> + /* xdp rxq used by xsk */
> + struct xdp_rxq_info xdp_rxq;
> + } xsk;
I don't see a special reason for having a container struct here.
> };
>
> /* This structure can contain rss message with maximum settings for
> indirection table and keysize
> @@ -4970,6 +4978,129 @@ static int virtnet_restore_guest_offloads(struct
> virtnet_info *vi)
> return virtnet_set_guest_offloads(vi, offloads);
> }
>
> +static int virtnet_rq_bind_xsk_pool(struct virtnet_info *vi, struct
> receive_queue *rq,
> + struct xsk_buff_pool *pool)
> +{
> + int err, qindex;
> +
> + qindex = rq - vi->rq;
> +
> + if (pool) {
> + err = xdp_rxq_info_reg(&rq->xsk.xdp_rxq, vi->dev, qindex,
> rq->napi.napi_id);
> + if (err < 0)
> + return err;
> +
> + err = xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(&rq->xsk.xdp_rxq,
> +MEM_TYPE_XSK_BUFF_POOL,
> NULL);
> + if (err < 0)
> + goto unreg;
> +
> + xsk_pool_set_rxq_info(pool, &rq->xsk.xdp_rxq);
> + }
> +
> + virtnet_rx_pause(vi, rq);
> +
> + err = virtqueue_reset(rq->vq, virtnet_rq_unmap_free_buf);
> + if (err) {
> + netdev_err(vi->dev, "reset rx fail: rx queue index: %d err:
> %d\n", qindex, err);
> +
> + pool = NULL;
> + }
> +
> + rq->xsk.pool = pool;
> +
> + virtnet_rx_resume(vi, rq);
> +
> + if (pool)
> + return 0;
> +
> +unreg:
> + xdp_rxq_info_unreg(&rq->xsk.xdp_rxq);
> + return err;
> +}
> +
> +static int virtnet_xsk_pool_enable(struct net_device *dev,
> + struct xsk_buff_pool *pool,
> + u16 qid)
> +{
> + struct virtnet_info *vi = netdev_priv(dev);
> + struct receive_queue *rq;
> + struct device *dma_dev;
> + struct send_queue *sq;
> + int err;
> +
> + /* In big_packets mode, xdp cannot work, so there is no need to
> +* initialize xsk of rq.
> +*/
> + if (vi->big_packets && !vi->mergeable_rx_bufs)
> + return -ENOENT;
> +
> + if (qid >= vi->curr_queue_pairs)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + sq = &vi->sq[qid];
> + rq = &vi->rq[qid];
> +
> + /* For the xsk, the tx and rx should have the same device. The af-xdp
> +* may use one buffer to receive from the rx and reuse this buffer to
> +* send by the tx. So the dma dev of sq and rq should be the same one.
> +*
> +* But vq->dma_dev allows every vq has the respective dma dev. So I
> +* check the dma dev of vq and sq is the same dev.
Not a native speaker, but it might be better to say "xsk assumes
to be the same device". And it might be better to replace "should"
with "must".
Others look good.
Thanks
