netdev - Re: Fighting out-of-order reception with RPS?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <559E0CDF.7080309@hartkopp.net>
Date:	Thu, 09 Jul 2015 07:55:43 +0200
From:	Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
CC:	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
	sunil.kovvuri@...il.com, jonathon.reinhart@...il.com
Subject: Re: Fighting out-of-order reception with RPS?


On 08.07.2015 23:17, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net> wrote:
(..)
>> When receiving CAN frames from a specific CAN network interface (e.g. can0)
>> the frames are sporadically out-of-order on SMP systems like my Core i7 laptop
>> with 4 CPUs. This out-of-order reception kills reliable communication e.g. for
>> CAN transport protocols.
>>
>> First approach was to set the smp_affinity for the USB adapter on irq 28 with:
(..)
>> Next idea was to use RPS after reading Documentation/networking/scaling.txt
(..)
>>
>> My two questions:
>>
>> 1. Is there any better solution to meet the described requirements?
>
> I would suggest that you look into how there are OOO packets in the
> first place. Even if the interrupts is allowed to happen on different
> CPUs by sm_affinity, NAPI execution should be serialized for the
> device so that OOO shouldn't happen. The result of your RPS setting
> should be all packets go to the same queue, this shouldn't normally
> affect the ordering. Looking at drivers/net/can there are apparently
> several variants of the driver. Do you know which one you're running?

I have two CAN hardware interfaces I can test together with a SMP system:

1. PCAN-USB using the driver at drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/
2. PCAN Compact PCIe using drivers/net/can/sja1000/(peak_pci.c / sja1000.c)

Both drivers do not use NAPI. The just follow the way

interrupt -> alloc_skb() -> fill skb -> netif_rx(skb)

I'm usually testing with the USB adapters as the PCIe setup is not very handy.

Best regards,
Oliver

>
>> 2. If not: How can enable this RPS solution by default for CAN interfaces?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html