mirror of
https://github.com/edk2-porting/linux-next.git
synced 2024-12-14 00:04:00 +08:00
SUNRPC: Separate buffer pointers for RPC Call and Reply messages
For xprtrdma, the RPC Call and Reply buffers are involved in real I/O operations. To start with, the DMA direction of the I/O for a Call is opposite that of a Reply. In the current arrangement, the Reply buffer address is on a four-byte alignment just past the call buffer. Would be friendlier on some platforms if that was at a DMA cache alignment instead. Because the current arrangement allocates a single memory region which contains both buffers, the RPC Reply buffer often contains a page boundary in it when the Call buffer is large enough (which is frequent). It would be a little nicer for setting up DMA operations (and possible registration of the Reply buffer) if the two buffers were separated, well-aligned, and contained as few page boundaries as possible. Now, I could just pad out the single memory region used for the pair of buffers. But frequently that would mean a lot of unused space to ensure the Reply buffer did not have a page boundary. Add a separate pointer to rpc_rqst that points right to the RPC Reply buffer. This makes no difference to xprtsock, but it will help xprtrdma in subsequent patches. Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Anna Schumaker <Anna.Schumaker@Netapp.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
3435c74aed
commit
68778945e4
@ -84,8 +84,9 @@ struct rpc_rqst {
|
||||
struct list_head rq_list;
|
||||
|
||||
void *rq_buffer; /* Call XDR encode buffer */
|
||||
size_t rq_callsize,
|
||||
rq_rcvsize;
|
||||
size_t rq_callsize;
|
||||
void *rq_rbuffer; /* Reply XDR decode buffer */
|
||||
size_t rq_rcvsize;
|
||||
size_t rq_xmit_bytes_sent; /* total bytes sent */
|
||||
size_t rq_reply_bytes_recvd; /* total reply bytes */
|
||||
/* received */
|
||||
|
@ -1766,7 +1766,7 @@ rpc_xdr_encode(struct rpc_task *task)
|
||||
req->rq_buffer,
|
||||
req->rq_callsize);
|
||||
xdr_buf_init(&req->rq_rcv_buf,
|
||||
(char *)req->rq_buffer + req->rq_callsize,
|
||||
req->rq_rbuffer,
|
||||
req->rq_rcvsize);
|
||||
|
||||
p = rpc_encode_header(task);
|
||||
|
@ -891,6 +891,7 @@ int rpc_malloc(struct rpc_task *task)
|
||||
dprintk("RPC: %5u allocated buffer of size %zu at %p\n",
|
||||
task->tk_pid, size, buf);
|
||||
rqst->rq_buffer = buf->data;
|
||||
rqst->rq_rbuffer = (char *)rqst->rq_buffer + rqst->rq_callsize;
|
||||
return 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(rpc_malloc);
|
||||
|
@ -524,6 +524,7 @@ out:
|
||||
dprintk("RPC: %s: size %zd, request 0x%p\n", __func__, size, req);
|
||||
req->rl_connect_cookie = 0; /* our reserved value */
|
||||
rqst->rq_buffer = req->rl_sendbuf->rg_base;
|
||||
rqst->rq_rbuffer = (char *)rqst->rq_buffer + rqst->rq_rcvsize;
|
||||
return 0;
|
||||
|
||||
out_rdmabuf:
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user