Re: 2.6.1[78] page allocation failure. order:3, mode:0x20

From: Auke Kok
Date: Sat Sep 23 2006 - 14:52:44 EST


Andrew Morton wrote:
On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 22:25:07 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 21:50:00 -0700

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 10:10:36 -0700
Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

e1000: account for NET_IP_ALIGN when calculating bufsiz

Account for NET_IP_ALIGN when requesting buffer sizes from netdev_alloc_skb to reduce slab allocation by half.
Could we please do whatever is needed to get this blessed and merged? This
is such a common problem on such a common driver that I would suggest that
we want this in 2.6.18.x as well. At least, I'd expect distributors to
ship this fix (they're nuts if they don't) and so it makes sense to deliver
it from kernel.org.
The NET_IP_ALIGN existed not just for fun :) There are ramifications
for removing it.

It's still there, isn't it?

For the 9k MTU case, for example, we end up allocating 16384 byte skbs
instead of 32786 kbytes ones.

yes, the only thing I'm doing is accounting for the 2 bytes one steap earlier. It works fine for the general case and I tested it too, but I am not too sure about the corner cases as the hardware has no notion of mtu at all and could possibly overwrite by two bytes. I think my patch actually give the hardware two bytes too much now, so we're on the other side (safe) of that problem, but I have to verify this first of course.

I'll be wrestling this on monday with Jesse and try to nail it down.

Auke



diff -puN drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c~e1000-account-for-net_ip_align-when-calculating-bufsiz drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
--- a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c~e1000-account-for-net_ip_align-when-calculating-bufsiz
+++ a/drivers/net/e1000/e1000_main.c
@@ -1101,7 +1101,7 @@ e1000_sw_init(struct e1000_adapter *adap
pci_read_config_word(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, &hw->pci_cmd_word);
- adapter->rx_buffer_len = MAXIMUM_ETHERNET_VLAN_SIZE;
+ adapter->rx_buffer_len = MAXIMUM_ETHERNET_VLAN_SIZE + NET_IP_ALIGN;
adapter->rx_ps_bsize0 = E1000_RXBUFFER_128;
hw->max_frame_size = netdev->mtu +
ENET_HEADER_SIZE + ETHERNET_FCS_SIZE;
@@ -3163,26 +3163,27 @@ e1000_change_mtu(struct net_device *netd
* larger slab size
* i.e. RXBUFFER_2048 --> size-4096 slab */
- if (max_frame <= E1000_RXBUFFER_256)
+ if (max_frame + NET_IP_ALIGN <= E1000_RXBUFFER_256)
adapter->rx_buffer_len = E1000_RXBUFFER_256;
- else if (max_frame <= E1000_RXBUFFER_512)
+ else if (max_frame + NET_IP_ALIGN <= E1000_RXBUFFER_512)
adapter->rx_buffer_len = E1000_RXBUFFER_512;
- else if (max_frame <= E1000_RXBUFFER_1024)
+ else if (max_frame + NET_IP_ALIGN <= E1000_RXBUFFER_1024)
adapter->rx_buffer_len = E1000_RXBUFFER_1024;
- else if (max_frame <= E1000_RXBUFFER_2048)
+ else if (max_frame + NET_IP_ALIGN <= E1000_RXBUFFER_2048)
adapter->rx_buffer_len = E1000_RXBUFFER_2048;
- else if (max_frame <= E1000_RXBUFFER_4096)
+ else if (max_frame + NET_IP_ALIGN <= E1000_RXBUFFER_4096)
adapter->rx_buffer_len = E1000_RXBUFFER_4096;
- else if (max_frame <= E1000_RXBUFFER_8192)
+ else if (max_frame + NET_IP_ALIGN <= E1000_RXBUFFER_8192)
adapter->rx_buffer_len = E1000_RXBUFFER_8192;
- else if (max_frame <= E1000_RXBUFFER_16384)
+ else
adapter->rx_buffer_len = E1000_RXBUFFER_16384;
/* adjust allocation if LPE protects us, and we aren't using SBP */
if (!adapter->hw.tbi_compatibility_on &&
((max_frame == MAXIMUM_ETHERNET_FRAME_SIZE) ||
(max_frame == MAXIMUM_ETHERNET_VLAN_SIZE)))
- adapter->rx_buffer_len = MAXIMUM_ETHERNET_VLAN_SIZE;
+ adapter->rx_buffer_len = MAXIMUM_ETHERNET_VLAN_SIZE +
+ NET_IP_ALIGN;
netdev->mtu = new_mtu;
@@ -4002,7 +4003,8 @@ e1000_alloc_rx_buffers(struct e1000_adap
struct e1000_buffer *buffer_info;
struct sk_buff *skb;
unsigned int i;
- unsigned int bufsz = adapter->rx_buffer_len + NET_IP_ALIGN;
+ /* we have already accounted for NET_IP_ALIGN */
+ unsigned int bufsz = adapter->rx_buffer_len;
i = rx_ring->next_to_use;
buffer_info = &rx_ring->buffer_info[i];
_
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html