[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250910155110-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2025 16:10:56 -0400
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
Cc: "patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org" <patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"eperezma@...hat.com" <eperezma@...hat.com>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@...ts.linux.dev" <virtualization@...ts.linux.dev>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: vhost_iotlb_miss tight loop lockup - RE vhost/net: Defer TX
queue re-enable until after sendmsg
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 06:58:18PM +0000, Jon Kohler wrote:
>
>
> > On May 5, 2025, at 9:40 PM, patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@...nel.org wrote:
> >
> > Hello:
> >
> > This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main)
> > by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>:
>
> Hey all,
> Writing to fire up a flare and point out a problem that we’re seeing
> with this patch internally, specifically when we enable iommu on the
> virtio-net device.
>
> With this patch applied on 6.12.y-based bare metal instance and then
> starting a 6.12.y based guest with iommu enabled, we see lockups
> within the guest in short order, as well as vmm (qemu) stuck in a tight
> loop responding to iommu misses from vhost net loop.
>
> We've bisected this in our internal tree, and for sure it is this
> patch that is alledgedly causing the problem, so I wanted to point out
> there is some sort of issue here.
>
> Working on trying to figure this out, but if jumps off the page to
> anyone, happy to take advice!
>
> Flamegraph:
> https://gist.github.com/JonKohler/0e83c014230ab59ddc950f10441335f1#file-iotlb-lockup-svg
>
> Guest dmesg errors like so:
> [ 66.081694] virtio_net virtio0 eth0: NETDEV WATCHDOG: CPU: 1: transmit queue 0 timed out 5500 ms
> [ 68.145155] virtio_net virtio0 eth0: TX timeout on queue: 0, sq: output.0, vq: 0x1, name: output.0, 7560000 usecs ago
> [ 112.907012] virtio_net virtio0 eth0: NETDEV WATCHDOG: CPU: 1: transmit queue 0 timed out 5568 ms
> [ 124.117540] virtio_net virtio0 eth0: TX timeout on queue: 0, sq: output.0, vq: 0x1, name: output.0, 16776000 usecs ago
> [ 124.118050] virtio_net virtio0 eth0: NETDEV WATCHDOG: CPU: 1: transmit queue 0 timed out 16776 ms
> [ 124.118447] virtio_net virtio0 eth0: TX timeout on queue: 0, sq: output.0, vq: 0x1, name: output.0, 16776000 usecs ago
>
> Host level top output
> 3992758 qemu 20 0 16.6g 52168 26704 R 99.9 0.0 21:23.72 qemu-kvm <<< this is the qemu main thread
> 3992769 qemu 20 0 16.6g 52168 26704 R 58.8 0.0 13:33.44 vhost-3992758 <<< this is the vhost-net kthread
>
> For qemu-kvm main thread:
> Samples: 13K of event 'cycles:P', 4000 Hz, Event count (approx.): 5131922583 lost: 0/0 drop: 0/0
> Children Self Shared Object Symbol
> - 87.41% 0.30% [kernel] [k] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
> - 87.11% entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe
> - do_syscall_64
> - 44.79% ksys_write
> - 43.74% vfs_write
> - 40.96% vhost_chr_write_iter
> - 38.22% vhost_process_iotlb_msg
> - 13.72% vhost_iotlb_add_range_ctx
> - 7.43% vhost_iotlb_map_free
> - 4.37% vhost_iotlb_itree_remove
> rb_next
> 1.78% __rb_erase_color
> 0.73% kfree
> 1.15% __rb_insert_augmented
> 0.68% __kmalloc_cache_noprof
> - 10.73% vhost_vq_work_queue
> - 7.65% try_to_wake_up
> - 2.55% ttwu_queue_wakelist
> - 1.72% __smp_call_single_queue
> 1.36% call_function_single_prep_ipi
> - 1.32% __task_rq_lock
> - _raw_spin_lock
> native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath
> - 1.30% select_task_rq
> - select_task_rq_fair
> - 0.88% wake_affine
> available_idle_cpu
> 2.06% llist_add_batch
> - 4.05% __mutex_lock.constprop.0
> 2.14% mutex_spin_on_owner
> 0.72% osq_lock
> 3.00% mutex_lock
> - 1.72% kfree
> - 1.16% __slab_free
> slab_update_freelist.constprop.0.isra.0
> 1.37% _raw_spin_lock
> 1.08% mutex_unlock
> 1.98% _copy_from_iter
> - 1.86% rw_verify_area
> - security_file_permission
> - 1.13% file_has_perm
> 0.69% avc_has_perm
> 0.63% fdget_pos
> - 27.86% syscall_exit_to_user_mode
> - syscall_exit_to_user_mode_prepare
> - 25.96% __audit_syscall_exit
> - 25.03% __audit_filter_op
> 6.66% audit_filter_rules.constprop.0
> 1.27% audit_reset_context.part.0.constprop.0
> - 10.86% ksys_read
> - 9.37% vfs_read
> - 6.67% vhost_chr_read_iter
> 1.48% _copy_to_iter
> 1.36% _raw_spin_lock
> - 1.30% __wake_up
> 0.81% _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
> - 1.25% vhost_enqueue_msg
> _raw_spin_lock
> - 1.83% rw_verify_area
> - security_file_permission
> - 1.03% file_has_perm
> 0.64% avc_has_perm
> 0.65% fdget_pos
> 0.57% fput
> - 2.56% syscall_trace_enter
> - 1.25% __seccomp_filter
> seccomp_run_filters
> 0.54% __audit_syscall_entry
>
> vhost-net thread
> Samples: 20K of event 'cycles:P', 4000 Hz, Event count (approx.): 7796456297 lost: 0/0 drop: 0/0
> Children Self Shared Object Symbol
> - 100.00% 3.38% [kernel] [k] vhost_task_fn
> 38.26% 0xffffffff930bb8c0
> - 3.36% 0
> ret_from_fork_asm
> ret_from_fork
> - 1.16% vhost_task_fn
> - 2.35% vhost_run_work_list
> - 1.67% handle_tx
> - 7.09% __mutex_lock.constprop.0
> 6.64% mutex_spin_on_owner
> - 0.84% vq_meta_prefetch
> - 3.22% iotlb_access_ok
> 2.50% vhost_iotlb_itree_first
> 0.80% mutex_lock
> - 0.75% handle_tx_copy
> 0.86% llist_reverse_order
>
> >
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 19:04:28 -0700 you wrote:
> >> In handle_tx_copy, TX batching processes packets below ~PAGE_SIZE and
> >> batches up to 64 messages before calling sock->sendmsg.
> >>
> >> Currently, when there are no more messages on the ring to dequeue,
> >> handle_tx_copy re-enables kicks on the ring *before* firing off the
> >> batch sendmsg. However, sock->sendmsg incurs a non-zero delay,
> >> especially if it needs to wake up a thread (e.g., another vhost worker).
> >>
> >> [...]
> >
> > Here is the summary with links:
> > - [net-next,v3] vhost/net: Defer TX queue re-enable until after sendmsg
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.kernel.org_netdev_net-2Dnext_c_8c2e6b26ffe2&d=DwIDaQ&c=s883GpUCOChKOHiocYtGcg&r=NGPRGGo37mQiSXgHKm5rCQ&m=0XoR6N9VbkaJ_wBENy8Z28uDdqjCe4HRNCyV-8o4etqXeEJOqoFFGjeGGP5sQcmt&s=-X8si_rU8pXKNyWNNzBqx5Fmv-ut9w2gS5E6coMDApM&e=
> >
> > You are awesome, thank you!
> > --
> > Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__korg.docs.kernel.org_patchwork_pwbot.html&d=DwIDaQ&c=s883GpUCOChKOHiocYtGcg&r=NGPRGGo37mQiSXgHKm5rCQ&m=0XoR6N9VbkaJ_wBENy8Z28uDdqjCe4HRNCyV-8o4etqXeEJOqoFFGjeGGP5sQcmt&s=sydedZsBCMSJM9_Ldw6Al-BplvM7FokLwV_80bJpGnM&e=
> >
> >
>
Well it seems that if get_tx_bufs failed with -EAGAIN then we
previously bailed out, but now we will redo poll and so on, forever.
No?
--
MST
Powered by blists - more mailing lists