mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Ratheesh Kannoth <rkannoth@marvell.com>
Cc: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
	<ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
	<edumazet@google.com>, <hawk@kernel.org>,
	<john.fastabend@gmail.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>,
	<pabeni@redhat.com>, <sdf@fomichev.me>, <sgoutham@marvell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v18 net-next 0/2] octeontx2: mqprio bandwidth offload for NIX TX schedulers
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2026 09:14:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261005091440.575f0eea@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <asMSSdIK6WBECcs_@rkannoth-OptiPlex-7090>

On Mon, 5 Oct 2026 08:28:17 +0530
Ratheesh Kannoth <rkannoth@marvell.com> wrote:

> On 2026-10-02 at 15:07:52, David Laight (david.laight.linux@gmail.com) wrote:
> > > Patch 1 converts PF/VF and representor flag access to atomic bitops.
> > > Patch 2 depends on it for safe OTX2_FLAG_INTF_DOWN and OTX2_FLAG_PORT_UP
> > > updates on asynchronous mbox paths and during the mqprio netdev bounce.  
> >
> > Can't you just move those two flags to a separate structure member?
> > In at least one place the code separately clears one and sets the other.
> > That makes me think it should a a three-valued state not two bits.
> >
> > That would save all the expensive locked operations.  
> 
> Thanks for your review.
> 
> I agree that atomizing the entire flags bitmap is broader than strictly required for the
> mqprio/mbox concurrency: the cross-CPU hazard is otx2_sync_flags_from_rep() doing a non-atomic
> read-modify-write on nic->flags while other CPUs update bits in the same word. Relocating
> OTX2_FLAG_INTF_DOWN and OTX2_FLAG_PORT_UP (or restricting rep sync so it cannot clobber those
> bits) would be a narrower approach than converting every OTX2_FLAG_* accessor to
> set_bit()/clear_bit().
> 
> On the three-valued model: INTF_DOWN and PORT_UP are not a single FSM in the driver today.
> INTF_DOWN reflects netdev teardown and is consulted from NAPI completion etc.
> PORT_UP is set and cleared from rep RVU_EVENT_PORT_STATE in the mbox up-handler and
> suppresses a duplicate carrier/queue bring-up in otx2_handle_link_event() when rep has already
> applied port state. Combinations such as INTF_DOWN set after otx2_stop() while PORT_UP remains
> set are deliberate, so folding the two bits into one enum would need a seperate work
> and review beyond this series.
> 
> please note that this restructuring feels somewhat orthogonal to the goals of the
> current series. Patch 1 focuses on replacing the non-atomic |=/&=~ operations on the
> stop/open and mbox paths with atomic bitops for INTF_DOWN/PORT_UP, which patch 2's netdev
> bounce depends on. The rep-flag sync behavior in otx2_sync_flags_from_rep() is a related but
> separate concern, and I'd prefer to address the lifecycle-bit layout and sync logic in a
> dedicated follow-up rather than expand the scope of this patch series.

Right, but the atomic updates are are far more expensive than the non-atomic ones.
They really are best avoided unless you really need to change/test multiple bits
or need to limit the size of the data area.
The patch is likely to be smaller if you remove the UP/DOWN bits from the bitmap
since it will change far less code.

David
 
> 
> >  


  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-05  8:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-29  2:29 Ratheesh Kannoth
2026-09-29  2:29 ` [PATCH v18 net-next 1/2] octeontx2: use atomic bitops for PF/VF and rep flags Ratheesh Kannoth
2026-10-02  8:31   ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-10-05  4:16     ` Ratheesh Kannoth
2026-09-29  2:29 ` [PATCH v18 net-next 2/2] octeontx2: add mqprio bandwidth offload for NIX TX schedulers Ratheesh Kannoth
2026-10-02  8:31   ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-10-02  1:22 ` [PATCH v18 net-next 0/2] octeontx2: " Jakub Kicinski
2026-10-02  9:37 ` David Laight
2026-10-05  2:58   ` Ratheesh Kannoth
2026-10-05  8:14     ` David Laight [this message]
2026-10-05  9:49       ` Ratheesh Kannoth

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=20261005091440.575f0eea@pumpkin \
    --to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=rkannoth@marvell.com \
    --cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
    --cc=sgoutham@marvell.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®