| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
Currently all SFs are using the same CPUs. Spreading SF over CPUs, in
round-robin manner, in order to achieve better distribution of the SFs
over available CPUs.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
Currently IRQs are requested one by one. To balance spreading IRQs
among cpus using such scheme requires remembering cpu mask for the
cpus used for a given device. This complicates the IRQ allocation
scheme in subsequent patch.
Hence, prepare the code for bulk IRQs allocation. This enables
spreading IRQs among cpus in subsequent patch.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
The downstream patches add more functionality to irq_pool_affinity.
Move the irq_pool_affinity logic to a new file in order to ease the
coding and maintenance of it.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
Currently, IRQ layer have a separate flow for ctrl and comp IRQs, and
the distinction between ctrl and comp IRQs is done in the IRQ layer.
In order to ease the coding and maintenance of the IRQ layer,
introduce a new API for requesting control IRQs -
mlx5_ctrl_irq_request(struct mlx5_core_dev *dev).
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
Control IRQ is the first IRQ vector. This complicates handling of
completion irqs as we need to offset them by one.
in the next patch, there are scenarios where completion and control EQs
will share the same irq. for example: functions with single IRQ. To ease
such scenarios, we shift control IRQ to the end of the irq array.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
Whenever users provided affinity for an EQ creation request, map the
EQ to a matching IRQ.
Matching IRQ=IRQ with the same affinity and type (completion/control) of
the EQ created.
This mapping is being done in agressive dedicated IRQ allocation scheme,
which described bellow.
First, we check whether there is a matching IRQ that his min threshold
is not exhausted.
- min_eqs_threshold = 3 for control EQ.
- min_eqs_threshold = 1 for completion EQ.
In case no matching IRQ was found, try to request a new IRQ.
In case we can't request a new IRQ, reuse least-used matching IRQ.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
SFs (Sub Functions) currently use IRQs from the global IRQ table their
parent Physical Function have. In order to better scale, we need to
allocate more IRQs and share them between different SFs.
Driver will maintain 3 separated irq pools:
1. A pool that serve the PF consumer (PF's netdev, rdma stacks), similar
to what the driver had before this patch. i.e, this pool will share irqs
between rdma and netev, and will keep the irq indexes and allocation
order. The last is important for PF netdev rmap (aRFS).
2. A pool of control IRQs for SFs. The size of this pool is the number
of SFs that can be created divided by SFS_PER_IRQ. This pool will serve
the control path EQs of the SFs.
3. A pool of completion data path IRQs for SFs transport queues. The
size of this pool is:
num_irqs_allocated - pf_pool_size - sf_ctrl_pool_size.
This pool will served netdev and rdma stacks. Moreover, rmap is not
supported on SFs.
Sharing methodology of the SFs pools is explained in the next patch.
Important note: rmap is not supported on SFs because rmap mapping cannot
function correctly for IRQs that are shared for different core/netdev RX
rings.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
Store newly created IRQs in the xarray DB instead of a static array,
so we will be able to store only IRQs which are being used.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
IRQs are being simplified in order to ease their sharing and any feature
specific object will be moved to upper layer.
Hence we move rmap object into eq_table.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
The users of EQ are running their code on different CPUs and with
various affinity patterns. Move the cpumask setting close to their
actual usage.
Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
|
Introduce new API that will allow IRQs users to hold a pointer to
mlx5_irq.
In the end of this series, IRQs will be allocated on demand. Hence,
this will allow us to properly manage and use IRQs.
Signed-off-by: Shay Drory <shayd@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>
|
