[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48294776.3010504@qumranet.com>
Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 10:47:02 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...ranet.com>
To: Mark McLoughlin <markmc@...hat.com>
CC: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Anthony Liguori <aliguori@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] virtio_net: free transmit skbs in a timer
Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> virtio_net currently only frees old transmit skbs just
> before queueing new ones. If the queue is full, it then
> enables interrupts and waits for notification that more
> work has been performed.
>
> However, a side-effect of this scheme is that there are
> always xmit skbs left dangling when no new packets are
> sent, against the Documentation/networking/driver.txt
> guideline:
>
> "... it is not allowed for your TX mitigation scheme
> to let TX packets "hang out" in the TX ring unreclaimed
> forever if no new TX packets are sent."
>
> Add a timer to ensure that any time we queue new TX
> skbs, we will shortly free them again.
>
> This fixes an easily reproduced hang at shutdown where
> iptables attempts to unload nf_conntrack and nf_conntrack
> waits for an skb it is tracking to be freed, but virtio_net
> never frees it.
>
Sorry to barge in late, but IMO the timer should be on the host, which
is cheaper than on the guest (well, a 100ms timer is likely zero cost,
but I still don't like it).
the host should fire a tx completion interrupt whenever the completion
queue has "enough" entries, where we can define "enough" now as the
halfway mark or a timer expiry, whichever comes earlier.
We can later improve "enough" to be "just enough so the timer never
triggers" and adjust it dynamically. It probably doesn't matter for
Linux, but I don't want to punish guests that can do true async
networking and depend on timely completion notification.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists