| Message ID | 20231219210357.4029713-4-dw@davidwei.uk (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | RFC |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Zero copy Rx using io_uring | expand |
| Context | Check | Description |
|---|---|---|
| netdev/tree_selection | success | Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply, async |
On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 1:04 PM David Wei <dw@davidwei.uk> wrote: > > From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> > > NOT FOR UPSTREAM > The final version will depend on how the ppiov infra looks like > > Page pool is tracking how many pages were allocated and returned, which > serves for refcounting the pool, and so every page/frag allocated should > eventually come back to the page pool via appropriate ways, e.g. by > calling page_pool_put_page(). > > When it comes to normal page pools (i.e. without memory providers > attached), it's fine to return a page when it's still refcounted by > somewhat in the stack, in which case we'll "detach" the page from the > pool and rely on page refcount for it to return back to the kernel. > > Memory providers are different, at least ppiov based ones, they need > all their buffers to eventually return back, so apart from custom pp > ->release handlers, we'll catch when someone puts down a ppiov and call > its memory provider to handle it, i.e. __page_pool_iov_free(). > > The first problem is that __page_pool_iov_free() hard coded devmem > handling, and other providers need a flexible way to specify their own > callbacks. > > The second problem is that it doesn't go through the generic page pool > paths and so can't do the mentioned pp accounting right. And we can't > even safely rely on page_pool_put_page() to be called somewhere before > to do the pp refcounting, because then the page pool might get destroyed > and ppiov->pp would point to garbage. > > The solution is to make the pp ->release callback to be responsible for > properly recycling its buffers, e.g. calling what was > __page_pool_iov_free() before in case of devmem. > page_pool_iov_put_many() will be returning buffers to the page pool. > Hmm this patch is working on top of slightly outdated code. I think the correct solution here is to transition to using pp_ref_count for refcounting the ppiovs/niovs. Once we do that, we no longer need special refcounting for ppiovs, they're refcounted identically to pages, makes the pp more maintainable, gives us some unified handling of page pool refcounting, it becomes trivial to support fragmented pages which require a pp_ref_count, and all the code in this patch can go away. I'm unsure if this patch is just because you haven't rebased to my latest RFC (which is completely fine by me), or if you actually think using pp_ref_count for refcounting is wrong and want us to go back to the older model which required some custom handling for ppiov and disabled frag support. I'm guessing it's the former, but please correct if I'm wrong. [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20231218024024.3516870-8-almasrymina@google.com/ > Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: David Wei <dw@davidwei.uk> > --- > include/net/page_pool/helpers.h | 15 ++++++++--- > net/core/page_pool.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++---------------- > 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h b/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h > index 92804c499833..ef380ee8f205 100644 > --- a/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h > +++ b/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h > @@ -137,15 +137,22 @@ static inline void page_pool_iov_get_many(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov, > refcount_add(count, &ppiov->refcount); > } > > -void __page_pool_iov_free(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov); > +static inline bool page_pool_iov_sub_and_test(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov, > + unsigned int count) > +{ > + return refcount_sub_and_test(count, &ppiov->refcount); > +} > > static inline void page_pool_iov_put_many(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov, > unsigned int count) > { > - if (!refcount_sub_and_test(count, &ppiov->refcount)) > - return; > + if (count > 1) > + WARN_ON_ONCE(page_pool_iov_sub_and_test(ppiov, count - 1)); > > - __page_pool_iov_free(ppiov); > +#ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL > + page_pool_put_defragged_page(ppiov->pp, page_pool_mangle_ppiov(ppiov), > + -1, false); > +#endif > } > > /* page pool mm helpers */ > diff --git a/net/core/page_pool.c b/net/core/page_pool.c > index 38eff947f679..ecf90a1ccabe 100644 > --- a/net/core/page_pool.c > +++ b/net/core/page_pool.c > @@ -599,6 +599,16 @@ void __page_pool_release_page_dma(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) > page_pool_set_dma_addr(page, 0); > } > > +static void page_pool_return_provider(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) > +{ > + int count; > + > + if (pool->mp_ops->release_page(pool, page)) { > + count = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(&pool->pages_state_release_cnt); > + trace_page_pool_state_release(pool, page, count); > + } > +} > + > /* Disconnects a page (from a page_pool). API users can have a need > * to disconnect a page (from a page_pool), to allow it to be used as > * a regular page (that will eventually be returned to the normal > @@ -607,13 +617,13 @@ void __page_pool_release_page_dma(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) > void page_pool_return_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) > { > int count; > - bool put; > > - put = true; > - if (static_branch_unlikely(&page_pool_mem_providers) && pool->mp_ops) > - put = pool->mp_ops->release_page(pool, page); > - else > - __page_pool_release_page_dma(pool, page); > + if (static_branch_unlikely(&page_pool_mem_providers) && pool->mp_ops) { > + page_pool_return_provider(pool, page); > + return; > + } > + > + __page_pool_release_page_dma(pool, page); > > /* This may be the last page returned, releasing the pool, so > * it is not safe to reference pool afterwards. > @@ -621,10 +631,8 @@ void page_pool_return_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) > count = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(&pool->pages_state_release_cnt); > trace_page_pool_state_release(pool, page, count); > > - if (put) { > - page_pool_clear_pp_info(page); > - put_page(page); > - } > + page_pool_clear_pp_info(page); > + put_page(page); > /* An optimization would be to call __free_pages(page, pool->p.order) > * knowing page is not part of page-cache (thus avoiding a > * __page_cache_release() call). > @@ -1034,15 +1042,6 @@ void page_pool_update_nid(struct page_pool *pool, int new_nid) > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_update_nid); > > -void __page_pool_iov_free(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov) > -{ > - if (ppiov->pp->mp_ops != &dmabuf_devmem_ops) > - return; > - > - netdev_free_devmem(ppiov); > -} > -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__page_pool_iov_free); > - > /*** "Dmabuf devmem memory provider" ***/ > > static int mp_dmabuf_devmem_init(struct page_pool *pool) > @@ -1093,9 +1092,12 @@ static bool mp_dmabuf_devmem_release_page(struct page_pool *pool, > return false; > > ppiov = page_to_page_pool_iov(page); > - page_pool_iov_put_many(ppiov, 1); > - /* We don't want the page pool put_page()ing our page_pool_iovs. */ > - return false; > + > + if (!page_pool_iov_sub_and_test(ppiov, 1)) > + return false; > + netdev_free_devmem(ppiov); > + /* tell page_pool that the ppiov is released */ > + return true; > } > > const struct pp_memory_provider_ops dmabuf_devmem_ops = { > -- > 2.39.3 >
On 12/19/23 23:35, Mina Almasry wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 1:04 PM David Wei <dw@davidwei.uk> wrote: >> >> From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> >> >> NOT FOR UPSTREAM >> The final version will depend on how the ppiov infra looks like >> >> Page pool is tracking how many pages were allocated and returned, which >> serves for refcounting the pool, and so every page/frag allocated should >> eventually come back to the page pool via appropriate ways, e.g. by >> calling page_pool_put_page(). >> >> When it comes to normal page pools (i.e. without memory providers >> attached), it's fine to return a page when it's still refcounted by >> somewhat in the stack, in which case we'll "detach" the page from the >> pool and rely on page refcount for it to return back to the kernel. >> >> Memory providers are different, at least ppiov based ones, they need >> all their buffers to eventually return back, so apart from custom pp >> ->release handlers, we'll catch when someone puts down a ppiov and call >> its memory provider to handle it, i.e. __page_pool_iov_free(). >> >> The first problem is that __page_pool_iov_free() hard coded devmem >> handling, and other providers need a flexible way to specify their own >> callbacks. >> >> The second problem is that it doesn't go through the generic page pool >> paths and so can't do the mentioned pp accounting right. And we can't >> even safely rely on page_pool_put_page() to be called somewhere before >> to do the pp refcounting, because then the page pool might get destroyed >> and ppiov->pp would point to garbage. >> >> The solution is to make the pp ->release callback to be responsible for >> properly recycling its buffers, e.g. calling what was >> __page_pool_iov_free() before in case of devmem. >> page_pool_iov_put_many() will be returning buffers to the page pool. >> > > Hmm this patch is working on top of slightly outdated code. I think> the correct solution here is to transition to using pp_ref_count for > refcounting the ppiovs/niovs. Once we do that, we no longer need > special refcounting for ppiovs, they're refcounted identically to > pages, makes the pp more maintainable, gives us some unified handling > of page pool refcounting, it becomes trivial to support fragmented > pages which require a pp_ref_count, and all the code in this patch can > go away. > > I'm unsure if this patch is just because you haven't rebased to my > latest RFC (which is completely fine by me), or if you actually think > using pp_ref_count for refcounting is wrong and want us to go back to > the older model which required some custom handling for ppiov and > disabled frag support. I'm guessing it's the former, but please > correct if I'm wrong. Right, it's based on older patches, it'd be a fool's work keep rebasing it while the code is still changing unless there is a good reason for that. I haven't taken a look at devmem v5, I definitely going to. IMHO, this approach is versatile and clear, but if there is a better one, I'm all for it.
diff --git a/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h b/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h index 92804c499833..ef380ee8f205 100644 --- a/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h +++ b/include/net/page_pool/helpers.h @@ -137,15 +137,22 @@ static inline void page_pool_iov_get_many(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov, refcount_add(count, &ppiov->refcount); } -void __page_pool_iov_free(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov); +static inline bool page_pool_iov_sub_and_test(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov, + unsigned int count) +{ + return refcount_sub_and_test(count, &ppiov->refcount); +} static inline void page_pool_iov_put_many(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov, unsigned int count) { - if (!refcount_sub_and_test(count, &ppiov->refcount)) - return; + if (count > 1) + WARN_ON_ONCE(page_pool_iov_sub_and_test(ppiov, count - 1)); - __page_pool_iov_free(ppiov); +#ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL + page_pool_put_defragged_page(ppiov->pp, page_pool_mangle_ppiov(ppiov), + -1, false); +#endif } /* page pool mm helpers */ diff --git a/net/core/page_pool.c b/net/core/page_pool.c index 38eff947f679..ecf90a1ccabe 100644 --- a/net/core/page_pool.c +++ b/net/core/page_pool.c @@ -599,6 +599,16 @@ void __page_pool_release_page_dma(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) page_pool_set_dma_addr(page, 0); } +static void page_pool_return_provider(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) +{ + int count; + + if (pool->mp_ops->release_page(pool, page)) { + count = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(&pool->pages_state_release_cnt); + trace_page_pool_state_release(pool, page, count); + } +} + /* Disconnects a page (from a page_pool). API users can have a need * to disconnect a page (from a page_pool), to allow it to be used as * a regular page (that will eventually be returned to the normal @@ -607,13 +617,13 @@ void __page_pool_release_page_dma(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) void page_pool_return_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) { int count; - bool put; - put = true; - if (static_branch_unlikely(&page_pool_mem_providers) && pool->mp_ops) - put = pool->mp_ops->release_page(pool, page); - else - __page_pool_release_page_dma(pool, page); + if (static_branch_unlikely(&page_pool_mem_providers) && pool->mp_ops) { + page_pool_return_provider(pool, page); + return; + } + + __page_pool_release_page_dma(pool, page); /* This may be the last page returned, releasing the pool, so * it is not safe to reference pool afterwards. @@ -621,10 +631,8 @@ void page_pool_return_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page) count = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(&pool->pages_state_release_cnt); trace_page_pool_state_release(pool, page, count); - if (put) { - page_pool_clear_pp_info(page); - put_page(page); - } + page_pool_clear_pp_info(page); + put_page(page); /* An optimization would be to call __free_pages(page, pool->p.order) * knowing page is not part of page-cache (thus avoiding a * __page_cache_release() call). @@ -1034,15 +1042,6 @@ void page_pool_update_nid(struct page_pool *pool, int new_nid) } EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_update_nid); -void __page_pool_iov_free(struct page_pool_iov *ppiov) -{ - if (ppiov->pp->mp_ops != &dmabuf_devmem_ops) - return; - - netdev_free_devmem(ppiov); -} -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__page_pool_iov_free); - /*** "Dmabuf devmem memory provider" ***/ static int mp_dmabuf_devmem_init(struct page_pool *pool) @@ -1093,9 +1092,12 @@ static bool mp_dmabuf_devmem_release_page(struct page_pool *pool, return false; ppiov = page_to_page_pool_iov(page); - page_pool_iov_put_many(ppiov, 1); - /* We don't want the page pool put_page()ing our page_pool_iovs. */ - return false; + + if (!page_pool_iov_sub_and_test(ppiov, 1)) + return false; + netdev_free_devmem(ppiov); + /* tell page_pool that the ppiov is released */ + return true; } const struct pp_memory_provider_ops dmabuf_devmem_ops = {