Message-Id: <20200610161226.424337-1-nitesh@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Jun 2020 12:12:23 -0400
From:   Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        frederic@...nel.org, mtosatti@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
        abelits@...vell.com, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...nel.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: [PATCH v1 0/3] Preventing job distribution to isolated CPUs

This patch-set is originated from one of the patches that have been
posted earlier as a part of "Task_isolation" mode [1] patch series
by Alex Belits <abelits@...vell.com>. There are only a couple of
changes that I am proposing in this patch-set compared to what Alex
has posted earlier.


Context
=======
On a broad level, all three patches that are included in this patch
set are meant to improve the driver/library to respect isolated
CPUs by not pinning any job on it. Not doing so could impact
the latency values in RT use-cases.


Patches
=======
* Patch1:
  The first patch is meant to make cpumask_local_spread()
  aware of the isolated CPUs. It ensures that the CPUs that
  are returned by this API only includes housekeeping CPUs.

* Patch2:
  This patch ensures that a probe function that is called
  using work_on_cpu() doesn't run any task on an isolated CPU.

* Patch3:
  This patch makes store_rps_map() aware of the isolated
  CPUs so that rps don't queue any jobs on an isolated CPU.


Changes
=======
To fix the above-mentioned issues Alex has used housekeeping_cpumask().
The only changes that I am proposing here are:
- Removing the dependency on CONFIG_TASK_ISOLATION that was proposed by Alex.
  As it should be safe to rely on housekeeping_cpumask()
  even when we don't have any isolated CPUs and we want
  to fall back to using all available CPUs in any of the above scenarios.
- Using both HK_FLAG_DOMAIN and HK_FLAG_WQ in all three patches, this is
  because we would want the above fixes not only when we have isolcpus but
  also with something like systemd's CPU affinity.


Testing
=======
* Patch 1:
  Fix for cpumask_local_spread() is tested by creating VFs, loading
  iavf module and by adding a tracepoint to confirm that only housekeeping
  CPUs are picked when an appropriate profile is set up and all remaining CPUs
  when no CPU isolation is required/configured.

* Patch 2:
  To test the PCI fix, I hotplugged a virtio-net-pci from qemu console
  and forced its addition to a specific node to trigger the code path that
  includes the proposed fix and verified that only housekeeping CPUs
  are included via tracepoint. I understand that this may not be the
  best way to test it, hence, I am open to any suggestion to test this
  fix in a better way if required.

* Patch 3:
  To test the fix in store_rps_map(), I tried configuring an isolated
  CPU by writing to /sys/class/net/en*/queues/rx*/rps_cpus which
  resulted in 'write error: Invalid argument' error. For the case
  where a non-isolated CPU is writing in rps_cpus the above operation
  succeeded without any error.

[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/patch/51102eebe62336c6a4e584c7a503553b9f90e01c.camel@marvell.com/

Alex Belits (3):
  lib: restricting cpumask_local_spread to only houskeeping CPUs
  PCI: prevent work_on_cpu's probe to execute on isolated CPUs
  net: restrict queuing of receive packets to housekeeping CPUs

 drivers/pci/pci-driver.c |  5 ++++-
 lib/cpumask.c            | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 net/core/net-sysfs.c     | 10 +++++++++-
 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

--  

Powered by blists - more mailing lists