[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aad52e2d-b4fc-2ab3-0877-ecb9a3a65336@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 11:18:49 +0100
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>
To: DENG Qingfang <dqfext@...il.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>
Cc: brouer@...hat.com, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: page_pool: use in_softirq() instead
On 03/02/2023 14.05, DENG Qingfang wrote:
> Hi Jesper,
>
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 7:15 PM Jesper Dangaard Brouer
> <jbrouer@...hat.com> wrote:
>> How can I enable threaded NAPI on my system?
>
> dev_set_threaded(napi_dev, true);
>
> You can also enable it at runtime by writing 1 to
> /sys/class/net/<devname>/threaded, but it only works if the driver
> does _not_ use a dummy netdev for NAPI poll.
>
Thanks for providing this setup info.
I quickly tested driver i40e with a XDP_DROP workload, and switch
between the threaded and normal NAPI, and no performance difference.
(p.s. driver i40e doesn't use page_pool)
>> I think other cases (above) are likely safe, but I worry a little about
>> this case, as the page_pool_recycle_in_cache() rely on RX-NAPI protection.
>> Meaning it is only the CPU that handles RX-NAPI for this RX-queue that
>> is allowed to access this lockless array.
>
> The major changes to the threaded NAPI is that instead of scheduling a
> NET_RX softirq, it wakes up a kthread which then does the polling,
> allowing it to be scheduled to another CPU. The driver's poll function
> is called with BH disabled so it's still considered BH context.
>
As long as drivers NAPI poll function doesn't migrate between CPUs while
it is running this should be fine. (This guarantee is needed as XDP + TC
have per_cpu bpf_redirect_info).
Looking at the code napi_threaded_poll() in net/core/dev.c I can see
this is guarantee is provided by the local_bh_disable() +
local_bh_enable around the call to __napi_poll().
>> We do have the 'allow_direct' boolean, and if every driver/user uses
>> this correctly, then this should be safe. Changing this makes it
>> possible for drivers to use page_pool API incorrectly and this leads to
>> hard-to-debug errors.
>
> "incorrectly", like, calling it outside RX-NAPI?
Yes.
--Jesper
Powered by blists - more mailing lists