[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8359a849-2b8a-c842-a501-c6cb6966e345@dd-wrt.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2020 12:38:00 +0200
From: Sebastian Gottschall <s.gottschall@...wrt.com>
To: Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Rakesh Pillai <pillair@...eaurora.org>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"ath10k@...ts.infradead.org" <ath10k@...ts.infradead.org>,
"dianders@...omium.org" <dianders@...omium.org>,
Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>,
"evgreen@...omium.org" <evgreen@...omium.org>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"johannes@...solutions.net" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kvalo@...eaurora.org" <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] Add support to process rx packets in thread
you may consider this
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1142611.html
<https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org/msg1142611.html>
years ago someone already wanted to bring this feature upstream, but it
was denied. i already tested this patch the last 2 days and it worked so
far (with some little modifications)
so such a solution existed already and may be considered here
Sebastian
someone
Am 25.07.2020 um 10:16 schrieb Hillf Danton:
> On Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:12:42 +0000 David Laight wrote:
>>> On 21 July 2020 18:25 Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 21, 2020 at 10:44:19PM +0530, Rakesh Pillai wrote:
>>>> NAPI gets scheduled on the CPU core which got the
>>>> interrupt. The linux scheduler cannot move it to a
>>>> different core, even if the CPU on which NAPI is running
>>>> is heavily loaded. This can lead to degraded wifi
>>>> performance when running traffic at peak data rates.
>>>>
>>>> A thread on the other hand can be moved to different
>>>> CPU cores, if the one on which its running is heavily
>>>> loaded. During high incoming data traffic, this gives
>>>> better performance, since the thread can be moved to a
>>>> less loaded or sometimes even a more powerful CPU core
>>>> to account for the required CPU performance in order
>>>> to process the incoming packets.
>>>>
>>>> This patch series adds the support to use a high priority
>>>> thread to process the incoming packets, as opposed to
>>>> everything being done in NAPI context.
>>> I don't see why this problem is limited to the ath10k driver. I expect
>>> it applies to all drivers using NAPI. So shouldn't you be solving this
>>> in the NAPI core? Allow a driver to request the NAPI core uses a
>>> thread?
>> It's not just NAPI the problem is with the softint processing.
>> I suspect a lot of systems would work better if it ran as
>> a (highish priority) kernel thread.
> Hi folks
>
> Below is a minimunm poc implementation I can imagine on top of workqueue
> to make napi threaded. Thoughts are appreciated.
>
>> I've had to remove the main locks from a multi-threaded application
>> and replace them with atomic counters.
>> Consider what happens when the threads remove items from a shared
>> work list.
>> The code looks like:
>> mutex_enter();
>> remove_item_from_list();
>> mutex_exit().
>> The mutex is only held for a few instructions, so while you'd expect
>> the cache line to be 'hot' you wouldn't get real contention.
>> However the following scenarios happen:
>> 1) An ethernet interrupt happens while the mutex is held.
>> This stops the other threads until all the softint processing
>> has finished.
>> 2) An ethernet interrupt (and softint) runs on a thread that is
>> waiting for the mutex.
>> (Or on the cpu that the thread's processor affinity ties it to.)
>> In this case the 'fair' (ticket) mutex code won't let any other
>> thread acquire the mutex.
>> So again everything stops until the softints all complete.
>>
>> The second one is also a problem when trying to wake up all
>> the threads (eg after adding a lot of items to the list).
>> The ticket locks force them to wake in order, but
>> sometimes the 'thundering herd' would work better.
>>
>> IIRC this is actually worse for processes running under the RT
>> scheduler (without CONFIG_PREEMPT) because the they are almost
>> always scheduled on the same cpu they ran on last.
>> If it is busy, but cannot be pre-empted, they are not moved
>> to an idle cpu.
>>
>> To confound things there is a very broken workaround for broken
>> hardware in the driver for the e1000 interface on (at least)
>> Ivy Bridge cpu that can cause the driver to spin for a very
>> long time (IIRC milliseconds) whenever it has to write to a
>> MAC register (ie on every transmit setup).
>>
>> David
>>
>> -
>> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
>> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
> To make napi threaded, if either irq or softirq thread is entirely ruled
> out, add napi::work that will be queued on a highpri workqueue. It is
> actually a unbound one to facilitate scheduler to catter napi loads on to
> idle CPU cores. What users need to do with the threaded napi
> is s/netif_napi_add/netif_threaded_napi_add/ and no more.
>
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -338,6 +338,9 @@ struct napi_struct {
> struct list_head dev_list;
> struct hlist_node napi_hash_node;
> unsigned int napi_id;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> + struct work_struct work;
> +#endif
> };
>
> enum {
> @@ -2234,6 +2237,19 @@ static inline void *netdev_priv(const st
> void netif_napi_add(struct net_device *dev, struct napi_struct *napi,
> int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int), int weight);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev, struct napi_struct *napi,
> + int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int), int weight);
> +#else
> +static inline void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev,
> + struct napi_struct *napi,
> + int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int),
> + int weight)
> +{
> + netif_napi_add(dev, napi, poll, weight);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> /**
> * netif_tx_napi_add - initialize a NAPI context
> * @dev: network device
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -6277,6 +6277,61 @@ static int process_backlog(struct napi_s
> return work;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> +/* unbound highpri workqueue for threaded napi */
> +static struct workqueue_struct *napi_workq;
> +
> +static void napi_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
> +{
> + struct napi_struct *n = container_of(work, struct napi_struct, work);
> +
> + for (;;) {
> + if (!test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state))
> + return;
> +
> + if (n->poll(n, n->weight) < n->weight)
> + return;
> +
> + if (need_resched()) {
> + /*
> + * have to pay for the latency of task switch even if
> + * napi is scheduled
> + */
> + if (test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &n->state))
> + queue_work(napi_workq, work);
> + return;
> + }
> + }
> +}
> +
> +void netif_threaded_napi_add(struct net_device *dev,
> + struct napi_struct *napi,
> + int (*poll)(struct napi_struct *, int),
> + int weight)
> +{
> + netif_napi_add(dev, napi, poll, weight);
> + INIT_WORK(&napi->work, napi_workfn);
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool is_threaded_napi(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> + return n->work.func == napi_workfn;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void threaded_napi_sched(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> + if (is_threaded_napi(n))
> + queue_work(napi_workq, &n->work);
> + else
> + ____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +}
> +#else
> +static inline void threaded_napi_sched(struct napi_struct *n)
> +{
> + ____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> /**
> * __napi_schedule - schedule for receive
> * @n: entry to schedule
> @@ -6289,7 +6344,7 @@ void __napi_schedule(struct napi_struct
> unsigned long flags;
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
> - ____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> + threaded_napi_sched(n);
> local_irq_restore(flags);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__napi_schedule);
> @@ -6335,7 +6390,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(napi_schedule_prep);
> */
> void __napi_schedule_irqoff(struct napi_struct *n)
> {
> - ____napi_schedule(this_cpu_ptr(&softnet_data), n);
> + threaded_napi_sched(n);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__napi_schedule_irqoff);
>
> @@ -10685,6 +10740,10 @@ static int __init net_dev_init(void)
> sd->backlog.weight = weight_p;
> }
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_THREADED_NAPI
> + napi_workq = alloc_workqueue("napi_workq", WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_HIGHPRI,
> + WQ_UNBOUND_MAX_ACTIVE);
> +#endif
> dev_boot_phase = 0;
>
> /* The loopback device is special if any other network devices
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath10k mailing list
> ath10k@...ts.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists