From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0F24C28CC2 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 22:08:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE57226F9C for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 22:08:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="RoAJZNVM" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726818AbfEaWIo (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2019 18:08:44 -0400 Received: from mail-it1-f194.google.com ([209.85.166.194]:32789 "EHLO mail-it1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726798AbfEaWIo (ORCPT ); Fri, 31 May 2019 18:08:44 -0400 Received: by mail-it1-f194.google.com with SMTP id j17so11969326itk.0 for ; Fri, 31 May 2019 15:08:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rk8vi2GT1Kz6DVRVbKN7nB2fCQvo4oUTFPvog4etFog=; b=RoAJZNVM9UNtsbDZIxdhytc/h/nYGp4cX/w7asLBFt+LL3YGdpSFVdLJ/u8wre27ep Zc72jhZEh9jdHPOl1iKQZqxVWeScamm/sKR1VLGzQx1nnXuZI+0MZf4kU+I8mYs+b6aU 0reiCICEaCdyO23EgeaBnKv2ESrzeKJv8FFJmVeneKkyZKYZjb41UYFYC3JxzhU0ZMM7 mLAEUPHlWqUQcTH3HrhRi39Dwvdc2zpwscy8iKNdbA6tJrTqOdtBEbVvoizFMbfRjwcl RcsfdbcOMjq7AKJqPUOpZehjtHVamaPcM26USwWACHuapHEqvJjFXNLfN3dULvKiJkcX SNdA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rk8vi2GT1Kz6DVRVbKN7nB2fCQvo4oUTFPvog4etFog=; b=gBS8Ulv5joUT5SiQCwHsHx0FGEciOKJiU2RWO+N3jJmIwwOpveG3A/e41ewUkVbA4T DFqTygn68T/AIqFHDAOwOM4uZpwN8Len8RjRrSc0BnUIzxUr333POPqLsnd5d8QfPIS5 jqeGZ4Hw0GvA1/bmJA8Zf+9zRin3u61hc7QaKbEZVyfRHRLpWjtXQpgvfHiA4kuZnbzr OUCmKoGh5FBxhQQ5QI4hmJJdE7An02DnkhRQIFiylf5NMiNcXIiLtCl210RTYL6Y+jta e8kMwLLaLxRQqHbp5N5p3tyWRQNlZZOMKEUq68itQ6sixxyZJ1Eu+a9xyzld2J1Wj2MJ QlWA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUHsffcGigMasNWyAxMhe2zNC/LfT7jNqwP+mioZ3/3Rqk+aviO miPALRqDehu2NFNQG6mDpvaXug== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzH+EMg6SX+BlsymH4Hq994bzynu2+kAA7hlzRr88AMlhERcDm6qIxgsjuFesiRwjur1MEYsA== X-Received: by 2002:a02:b817:: with SMTP id o23mr8340150jam.134.1559340522683; Fri, 31 May 2019 15:08:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [172.22.22.26] (c-71-195-29-92.hsd1.mn.comcast.net. [71.195.29.92]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id p11sm3398687itc.2.2019.05.31.15.08.41 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 31 May 2019 15:08:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/17] net: introduce Qualcomm IPA driver To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Dan Williams , David Miller , Bjorn Andersson , Ilias Apalodimas , evgreen@chromium.org, Ben Chan , Eric Caruso , cpratapa@codeaurora.org, syadagir@codeaurora.org, Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan , abhishek.esse@gmail.com, Networking , DTML , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, Linux ARM , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org References: <20190531035348.7194-1-elder@linaro.org> <065c95a8-7b17-495d-f225-36c46faccdd7@linaro.org> From: Alex Elder Message-ID: <5ebccdbe-479d-2b7d-693c-0c412060d687@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 17:08:40 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 5/31/19 4:12 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:47 PM Alex Elder wrote: >> On 5/31/19 2:19 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 6:36 PM Alex Elder wrote: >>>> On 5/31/19 9:58 AM, Dan Williams wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 2019-05-30 at 22:53 -0500, Alex Elder wrote: >>> >>> Does this mean that IPA can only be used to back rmnet, and rmnet >>> can only be used on top of IPA, or can or both of them be combined >>> with another driver to talk to instead? >> >> No it does not mean that. >> >> As I understand it, one reason for the rmnet layer was to abstract >> the back end, which would allow using a modem, or using something >> else (a LAN?), without exposing certain details of the hardware. >> (Perhaps to support multiplexing, etc. without duplicating that >> logic in two "back-end" drivers?) >> >> To be perfectly honest, at first I thought having IPA use rmnet >> was a cargo cult thing like Dan suggested, because I didn't see >> the benefit. I now see why one would use that pass-through layer >> to handle the QMAP features. >> >> But back to your question. The other thing is that I see no >> reason the IPA couldn't present a "normal" (non QMAP) interface >> for a modem. It's something I'd really like to be able to do, >> but I can't do it without having the modem firmware change its >> configuration for these endpoints. My access to the people who >> implement the modem firmware has been very limited (something >> I hope to improve), and unless and until I can get corresponding >> changes on the modem side to implement connections that don't >> use QMAP, I can't implement such a thing. > > Why would that require firmware changes? What I was thinking > here is to turn the bits of the rmnet driver that actually do anything > interesting on the headers into a library module (or a header file > with inline functions) that can be called directly by the ipa driver, > keeping the protocol unchanged. You know, it's possible you're right about not needing firmware changes. But it has always been my impression they would be needed. Here's why. It looks like this: GSI Channel GSI Channel | | ---------- v ------- v ------------- | AP (ep)|=======| IPA |=======|(ep) Modem | ---------- ------- ------------- The AP and Modem each have IPA endpoints (ep), which use GSI channels, to communicate with the IPA. Each endpoint has configuration options (such as checksum offload). I *thought* that the configurations of the two endpoints need to be compatible (e.g., they need to agree on whether they're aggregating). But with your questioning I now think you may be right, that only the local endpoint's configuration matters. I will inquire further on this. I *know* that the AP and modem exchange some information about IPA configuration, but looking more closely that looks like it's all about the configuration of shared IPA resources, not endpoints. That said, the broader design (including the user space code) surely assumes rmnet, and I don't have any sense of what impact changing that would make. I am sure that changing it would not be well received. -Alex >>> Always passing data from one netdev to another both ways >>> sounds like it introduces both direct CPU overhead, and >>> problems with flow control when data gets buffered inbetween. >> >> My impression is the rmnet driver is a pretty thin layer, >> so the CPU overhead is probably not that great (though >> deaggregating a message is expensive). I agree with you >> on the flow control. > > The CPU overhead I mean is not from executing code in the > rmnet driver, but from passing packets through the network > stack between the two drivers, i.e. adding each frame to > a queue and taking it back out. I'm not sure how this ends > up working in reality but from a first look it seems like > we might bounce in an out of the softirq handler inbetween. > > Arnd >