[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eaff25bc-9b64-037e-b9bc-c06fc4a5a9fb@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 08:55:41 +0800
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
To: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>, Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>
CC: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Kehuan Feng <kehuan.feng@...il.com>,
Jike Song <albcamus@...il.com>,
Jonas Bonn <jonas.bonn@...rounds.com>,
Michael Zhivich <mzhivich@...mai.com>,
"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Michal Kubecek" <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Josh Hunt <johunt@...mai.com>
Subject: Re: Packet gets stuck in NOLOCK pfifo_fast qdisc
On 2021/4/3 20:23, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Apr 2021, Hillf Danton wrote:
>
>>>>> Sure. Seems they crept in over time. I had some plans to write a
>>>>> lockless HTB implementation. But with fq+EDT with BPF it seems that
>>>>> it is no longer needed, we have a more generic/better solution. So
>>>>> I dropped it. Also most folks should really be using fq, fq_codel,
>>>>> etc. by default anyways. Using pfifo_fast alone is not ideal IMO.
>>>>
>>>> Half a year later, we still have the NOLOCK implementation
>>>> present, and pfifo_fast still does set the TCQ_F_NOLOCK flag on itself.
>>>>
>>>> And we've just been bitten by this very same race which appears to be
>>>> still unfixed, with single packet being stuck in pfifo_fast qdisc
>>>> basically indefinitely due to this very race that this whole thread began
>>>> with back in 2019.
>>>>
>>>> Unless there are
>>>>
>>>> (a) any nice ideas how to solve this in an elegant way without
>>>> (re-)introducing extra spinlock (Cong's fix) or
>>>>
>>>> (b) any objections to revert as per the argumentation above
>>>>
>>>> I'll be happy to send a revert of the whole NOLOCK implementation next
>>>> week.
>>>>
>>> Jiri
>>>
>>
>> Feel free to revert it as the scorch wont end without a deluge.
>
> I am still planning to have Yunsheng Lin's (CCing) fix [1] tested in the
> coming days. If it works, then we can consider proceeding with it,
> otherwise I am all for reverting the whole NOLOCK stuff.
Hi, Jiri
Do you have a reproducer that can be shared here?
With reproducer, I can debug and test it myself too.
Thanks.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/1616641991-14847-1-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com/T/#u
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists