lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jun]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 rdma-next] RDMA/mlx5: Enable Relaxed Ordering by default for kernel ULPs
On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 08:36:07AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 10:39:16AM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> >
> > On 6/24/2021 9:38 AM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 02:06:46AM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> > > > On 6/9/2021 2:05 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > From: Avihai Horon <avihaih@nvidia.com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Relaxed Ordering is a capability that can only benefit users that support
> > > > > it. All kernel ULPs should support Relaxed Ordering, as they are designed
> > > > > to read data only after observing the CQE and use the DMA API correctly.
> > > > >
> > > > > Hence, implicitly enable Relaxed Ordering by default for kernel ULPs.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Avihai Horon <avihaih@nvidia.com>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
> > > > > Changelog:
> > > > > v2:
> > > > > * Dropped IB/core patch and set RO implicitly in mlx5 exactly like in
> > > > > eth side of mlx5 driver.
> > > > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/cover.1621505111.git.leonro@nvidia.com
> > > > > * Enabled by default RO in IB/core instead of changing all users
> > > > > v0: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210405052404.213889-1-leon@kernel.org
> > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c | 10 ++++++----
> > > > > drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/wr.c | 5 ++++-
> > > > > 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c
> > > > > index 3363cde85b14..2182e76ae734 100644
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c
> > > > > @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ static void set_mkc_access_pd_addr_fields(void *mkc, int acc, u64 start_addr,
> > > > > struct ib_pd *pd)
> > > > > {
> > > > > struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev = to_mdev(pd->device);
> > > > > + bool ro_pci_enabled = pcie_relaxed_ordering_enabled(dev->mdev->pdev);
> > > > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, a, !!(acc & IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_ATOMIC));
> > > > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, rw, !!(acc & IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_WRITE));
> > > > > @@ -78,10 +79,10 @@ static void set_mkc_access_pd_addr_fields(void *mkc, int acc, u64 start_addr,
> > > > > if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, relaxed_ordering_write))
> > > > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, relaxed_ordering_write,
> > > > > - !!(acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING));
> > > > > + acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING && ro_pci_enabled);
> > > > > if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, relaxed_ordering_read))
> > > > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, relaxed_ordering_read,
> > > > > - !!(acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING));
> > > > > + acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING && ro_pci_enabled);
> > > > Jason,
> > > >
> > > > If it's still possible to add small change, it will be nice to avoid
> > > > calculating "acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING && ro_pci_enabled" twice.
> > > The patch is part of for-next now, so feel free to send followup patch.
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c
> > > index c1e70c99b70c..c4f246c90c4d 100644
> > > +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/mlx5/mr.c
> > > @@ -69,7 +69,8 @@ static void set_mkc_access_pd_addr_fields(void *mkc, int acc, u64 start_addr,
> > > struct ib_pd *pd)
> > > {
> > > struct mlx5_ib_dev *dev = to_mdev(pd->device);
> > > - bool ro_pci_enabled = pcie_relaxed_ordering_enabled(dev->mdev->pdev);
> > > + bool ro_pci_enabled = acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING &&
> > > + pcie_relaxed_ordering_enabled(dev->mdev->pdev);
> > >
> > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, a, !!(acc & IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_ATOMIC));
> > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, rw, !!(acc & IB_ACCESS_REMOTE_WRITE));
> > > @@ -78,11 +79,9 @@ static void set_mkc_access_pd_addr_fields(void *mkc, int acc, u64 start_addr,
> > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, lr, 1);
> > >
> > > if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, relaxed_ordering_write))
> > > - MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, relaxed_ordering_write,
> > > - (acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING) && ro_pci_enabled);
> > > + MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, relaxed_ordering_write, ro_pci_enabled);
> > > if (MLX5_CAP_GEN(dev->mdev, relaxed_ordering_read))
> > > - MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, relaxed_ordering_read,
> > > - (acc & IB_ACCESS_RELAXED_ORDERING) && ro_pci_enabled);
> > > + MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, relaxed_ordering_read, ro_pci_enabled);
> > >
> > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, pd, to_mpd(pd)->pdn);
> > > MLX5_SET(mkc, mkc, qpn, 0xffffff);
> > > (END)
> > >
> > Yes this looks good.
> >
> > Can you/Avihai create a patch from this ? or I'll do it ?
>
> I'd be surpised if it matters.. CSE and all

From bytecode/performance POV, It shouldn't change anything.
However it looks better.

Thanks

>
> Jason

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-06-27 09:33    [W:0.091 / U:0.344 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site