On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 03:12:45PM +0800, Wei Hu (Xavier) wrote:
>
>
> On 2018/5/23 15:00, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 02:49:35PM +0800, Wei Hu (Xavier) wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2018/5/23 14:05, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> >>> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 04:02:50PM +0800, Wei Hu (Xavier) wrote:
> >>>> This patch modified uar allocation algorithm in hns_roce_uar_alloc
> >>>> function to avoid bitmap exhaust.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Wei Hu (Xavier) <xavier.hu...@huawei.com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_device.h | 1 +
> >>>> drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_pd.c | 10 ++++++----
> >>>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_device.h
> >>>> b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_device.h
> >>>> index 53c2f1b..412297d4 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_device.h
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_device.h
> >>>> @@ -214,6 +214,7 @@ enum {
> >>>> struct hns_roce_uar {
> >>>> u64 pfn;
> >>>> unsigned long index;
> >>>> + unsigned long logic_idx;
> >>>> };
> >>>>
> >>>> struct hns_roce_ucontext {
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_pd.c
> >>>> b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_pd.c
> >>>> index 4b41e04..b9f2c87 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_pd.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/infiniband/hw/hns/hns_roce_pd.c
> >>>> @@ -107,13 +107,15 @@ int hns_roce_uar_alloc(struct hns_roce_dev
> >>>> *hr_dev, struct hns_roce_uar *uar)
> >>>> int ret = 0;
> >>>>
> >>>> /* Using bitmap to manager UAR index */
> >>>> - ret = hns_roce_bitmap_alloc(&hr_dev->uar_table.bitmap,
> >>>> &uar->index);
> >>>> + ret = hns_roce_bitmap_alloc(&hr_dev->uar_table.bitmap,
> >>>> &uar->logic_idx);
> >>>> if (ret == -1)
> >>>> return -ENOMEM;
> >>>>
> >>>> - if (uar->index > 0)
> >>>> - uar->index = (uar->index - 1) %
> >>>> + if (uar->logic_idx > 0 && hr_dev->caps.phy_num_uars > 1)
> >>>> + uar->index = (uar->logic_idx - 1) %
> >>>> (hr_dev->caps.phy_num_uars - 1) + 1;
> >>>> + else
> >>>> + uar->index = 0;
> >>>>
> >>> Sorry, but maybe I didn't understand this change fully, but logic_idx is
> >>> not initialized at all and one of two (needs to check your uar
> >>> allocation): the logic_idx is always zero -> index will be zero too,
> >>> or logic_idx is random variable -> index will be random too.
> >>>
> >>> What did you want to do?
> >>>
> >> Hi, Leon
> >>
> >> The prototype of hns_roce_bitmap_alloc as belows:
> >> int hns_roce_bitmap_alloc(struct hns_roce_bitmap *bitmap,
> >> unsigned long *obj);
> >> In this statement, we evaluate uar->logic_idx.
> >> ret = hns_roce_bitmap_alloc(&hr_dev->uar_table.bitmap,
> >> &uar->logic_idx);
> >>
> >> In hip06, hr_dev->caps.phy_num_uars equals 8,
> >> if (uar->logic_idx > 0)
> >> uar-> index = 0;
> >> else
> >> uar-> index =(uar->logic_idx - 1) %
> >> (hr_dev->caps.phy_num_uars - 1) + 1;
> >> In hip08, hr_dev->caps.phy_num_uars equals 1, uar-> index = 0;
> >>
> >> Regards
> > Where did you change/set logic_idx?
> In hns_roce_uar_alloc,
> ret = hns_roce_bitmap_alloc(&hr_dev->uar_table.bitmap, &uar->logic_idx);
> In hns_roce_uar_free,
> hns_roce_bitmap_free(&hr_dev->uar_table.bitmap, uar->logic_idx,
> BITMAP_NO_RR);
>I see it, thanks Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leo...@mellanox.com>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
