[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210210040802-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2021 04:14:21 -0500
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] virtio-net: suppress bad irq warning for tx napi
On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 10:00:22AM -0800, Wei Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 6:58 AM Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > > >>> I have no preference. Just curious, especially if it complicates the patch.
> > > >>>
> > > >> My understanding is that. It's probably ok for net. But we probably need
> > > >> to document the assumptions to make sure it was not abused in other drivers.
> > > >>
> > > >> Introduce new parameters for find_vqs() can help to eliminate the subtle
> > > >> stuffs but I agree it looks like a overkill.
> > > >>
> > > >> (Btw, I forget the numbers but wonder how much difference if we simple
> > > >> remove the free_old_xmits() from the rx NAPI path?)
> > > > The committed patchset did not record those numbers, but I found them
> > > > in an earlier iteration:
> > > >
> > > > [PATCH net-next 0/3] virtio-net tx napi
> > > > https://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2017/04/02/55
> > > >
> > > > It did seem to significantly reduce compute cycles ("Gcyc") at the
> > > > time. For instance:
> > > >
> > > > TCP_RR Latency (us):
> > > > 1x:
> > > > p50 24 24 21
> > > > p99 27 27 27
> > > > Gcycles 299 432 308
> > > >
> > > > I'm concerned that removing it now may cause a regression report in a
> > > > few months. That is higher risk than the spurious interrupt warning
> > > > that was only reported after years of use.
> > >
> > >
> > > Right.
> > >
> > > So if Michael is fine with this approach, I'm ok with it. But we
> > > probably need to a TODO to invent the interrupt handlers that can be
> > > used for more than one virtqueues. When MSI-X is enabled, the interrupt
> > > handler (vring_interrup()) assumes the interrupt is used by a single
> > > virtqueue.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > The approach to schedule tx-napi from virtnet_poll_cleantx instead of
> > cleaning directly in this rx-napi function was not effective at
> > suppressing the warning, I understand.
>
> Correct. I tried the approach to schedule tx napi instead of directly
> do free_old_xmit_skbs() in virtnet_poll_cleantx(). But the warning
> still happens.
Two questions here: is the device using packed or split vqs?
And is event index enabled?
I think one issue is that at the moment with split and event index we
don't actually disable events at all.
static void virtqueue_disable_cb_split(struct virtqueue *_vq)
{
struct vring_virtqueue *vq = to_vvq(_vq);
if (!(vq->split.avail_flags_shadow & VRING_AVAIL_F_NO_INTERRUPT)) {
vq->split.avail_flags_shadow |= VRING_AVAIL_F_NO_INTERRUPT;
if (!vq->event)
vq->split.vring.avail->flags =
cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev,
vq->split.avail_flags_shadow);
}
}
Can you try your napi patch + disable event index?
--
MST
Powered by blists - more mailing lists