Message-ID: <4418BA21-716E-468B-85EB-DB88CCD64F38@nutanix.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 15:33:32 +0000
From: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        "eperezma@...hat.com"
	<eperezma@...hat.com>,
        "jonah.palmer@...cle.com" <jonah.palmer@...cle.com>,
        "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "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>,
        "stable@...r.kernel.org"
	<stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] vhost-net: correctly flush batched packet before
 enabling notification



> On Sep 12, 2025, at 11:30 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> 
> !-------------------------------------------------------------------|
>  CAUTION: External Email
> 
> |-------------------------------------------------------------------!
> 
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 03:24:42PM +0000, Jon Kohler wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Sep 12, 2025, at 4:50 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> !-------------------------------------------------------------------|
>>> CAUTION: External Email
>>> 
>>> |-------------------------------------------------------------------!
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 04:26:58PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> Commit 8c2e6b26ffe2 ("vhost/net: Defer TX queue re-enable until after
>>>> sendmsg") tries to defer the notification enabling by moving the logic
>>>> out of the loop after the vhost_tx_batch() when nothing new is
>>>> spotted. This will bring side effects as the new logic would be reused
>>>> for several other error conditions.
>>>> 
>>>> One example is the IOTLB: when there's an IOTLB miss, get_tx_bufs()
>>>> might return -EAGAIN and exit the loop and see there's still available
>>>> buffers, so it will queue the tx work again until userspace feed the
>>>> IOTLB entry correctly. This will slowdown the tx processing and may
>>>> trigger the TX watchdog in the guest.
>>> 
>>> It's not that it might.
>>> Pls clarify that it *has been reported* to do exactly that,
>>> and add a link to the report.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> Fixing this by stick the notificaiton enabling logic inside the loop
>>>> when nothing new is spotted and flush the batched before.
>>>> 
>>>> Reported-by: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com>
>>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>>> Fixes: 8c2e6b26ffe2 ("vhost/net: Defer TX queue re-enable until after sendmsg")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
>>> 
>>> So this is mostly a revert, but with
>>>                    vhost_tx_batch(net, nvq, sock, &msg);
>>> added in to avoid regressing performance.
>>> 
>>> If you do not want to structure it like this (revert+optimization),
>>> then pls make that clear in the message.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/vhost/net.c | 33 +++++++++++++--------------------
>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c
>>>> index 16e39f3ab956..3611b7537932 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/vhost/net.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c
>>>> @@ -765,11 +765,11 @@ static void handle_tx_copy(struct vhost_net *net, struct socket *sock)
>>>> int err;
>>>> int sent_pkts = 0;
>>>> bool sock_can_batch = (sock->sk->sk_sndbuf == INT_MAX);
>>>> - bool busyloop_intr;
>>>> bool in_order = vhost_has_feature(vq, VIRTIO_F_IN_ORDER);
>>>> 
>>>> do {
>>>> - busyloop_intr = false;
>>>> + bool busyloop_intr = false;
>>>> +
>>>> if (nvq->done_idx == VHOST_NET_BATCH)
>>>> vhost_tx_batch(net, nvq, sock, &msg);
>>>> 
>>>> @@ -780,10 +780,18 @@ static void handle_tx_copy(struct vhost_net *net, struct socket *sock)
>>>> break;
>>>> /* Nothing new?  Wait for eventfd to tell us they refilled. */
>>>> if (head == vq->num) {
>>>> - /* Kicks are disabled at this point, break loop and
>>>> - * process any remaining batched packets. Queue will
>>>> - * be re-enabled afterwards.
>>>> + /* Flush batched packets before enabling
>>>> + * virqtueue notification to reduce
>>>> + * unnecssary virtqueue kicks.
>>> 
>>> typos: virtqueue, unnecessary
>>> 
>>>> */
>>>> + vhost_tx_batch(net, nvq, sock, &msg);
>>>> + if (unlikely(busyloop_intr)) {
>>>> + vhost_poll_queue(&vq->poll);
>>>> + } else if (unlikely(vhost_enable_notify(&net->dev,
>>>> + vq))) {
>>>> + vhost_disable_notify(&net->dev, vq);
>>>> + continue;
>>>> + }
>>>> break;
>>>> }
>> 
>> See my comment below, but how about something like this?
>> if (head == vq->num) {
>> /* Flush batched packets before enabling
>> * virtqueue notification to reduce
>> * unnecessary virtqueue kicks.
>> */
>> vhost_tx_batch(net, nvq, sock, &msg);
>> if (unlikely(busyloop_intr))
>> /* If interrupted while doing busy polling,
>> * requeue the handler to be fair handle_rx
>> * as well as other tasks waiting on cpu.
>> */
>> vhost_poll_queue(&vq->poll);
>> else
>> /* All of our work has been completed;
>> * however, before leaving the TX handler,
>> * do one last check for work, and requeue
>> * handler if necessary. If there is no work,
>> * queue will be reenabled.
>> */
>> vhost_net_busy_poll_try_queue(net, vq);
> 
> 
> I mean it's functionally equivalent, but vhost_net_busy_poll_try_queue 
> checks the avail ring again and we just checked it.
> Why is this a good idea?
> This happens on good path so I dislike unnecessary work like this.

For the sake of discussion, let’s say vhost_tx_batch and the
sendmsg within took 1 full second to complete. A lot could potentially
happen in that amount of time. So sure, control path wise it looks like
we just checked it, but time wise, that could have been ages ago.

> 
> 
>> break;
>> }
>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> @@ -839,22 +847,7 @@ static void handle_tx_copy(struct vhost_net *net, struct socket *sock)
>>>> ++nvq->done_idx;
>>>> } while (likely(!vhost_exceeds_weight(vq, ++sent_pkts, total_len)));
>>>> 
>>>> - /* Kicks are still disabled, dispatch any remaining batched msgs. */
>>>> vhost_tx_batch(net, nvq, sock, &msg);
>>>> -
>>>> - if (unlikely(busyloop_intr))
>>>> - /* If interrupted while doing busy polling, requeue the
>>>> - * handler to be fair handle_rx as well as other tasks
>>>> - * waiting on cpu.
>>>> - */
>>>> - vhost_poll_queue(&vq->poll);
>>>> - else
>>>> - /* All of our work has been completed; however, before
>>>> - * leaving the TX handler, do one last check for work,
>>>> - * and requeue handler if necessary. If there is no work,
>>>> - * queue will be reenabled.
>>>> - */
>>>> - vhost_net_busy_poll_try_queue(net, vq);
>> 
>> Note: the use of vhost_net_busy_poll_try_queue was intentional in my
>> patch as it was checking to see both conditionals.
>> 
>> Can we simply hoist my logic up instead?
>> 
>>>> }
>>>> 
>>>> static void handle_tx_zerocopy(struct vhost_net *net, struct socket *sock)
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.34.1
>>> 
>> 
>> Tested-by: Jon Kohler <jon@...anix.com <mailto:jon@...anix.com>>
>> 
>> Tried this out on a 6.16 host / guest that locked up with iotlb miss loop,
>> applied this patch and all was well.
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists