Received-SPF: softfail (google.com: domain of transitioning linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org does not designate 23.128.96.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.19;
Date:   Wed, 6 Apr 2022 15:54:28 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Liao Chang <liaochang1@huawei.com>
Cc:     mcgrof@kernel.org, keescook@chromium.org, yzaikin@google.com,
        tglx@linutronix.de, clg@kaod.org, nitesh@redhat.com,
        edumazet@google.com, peterz@infradead.org, joshdon@google.com,
        masahiroy@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        vbabka@suse.cz, gustavoars@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de,
        chris@chrisdown.name, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com,
        linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        john.ogness@linutronix.de, will@kernel.org, dave@stgolabs.net,
        frederic@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, heying24@huawei.com,
        guohanjun@huawei.com, weiyongjun1@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] softirq: Introduce softirq throttling
Message-ID: <Yk2ppI60P98E2Qj5@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20220406025241.191300-1-liaochang1@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220406025241.191300-1-liaochang1@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 06, 2022 at 10:52:38AM +0800, Liao Chang wrote:
> Kernel check for pending softirqs periodically, they are performed in a
> few points of kernel code, such as irq_exit() and __local_bh_enable_ip(),
> softirqs that have been activated by a given CPU must be executed on the
> same CPU, this characteristic of softirq is always a potentially
> "dangerous" operation, because one CPU might be end up very busy while
> the other are most idle.
> 
> Above concern is proven in a networking user case: recenlty, we
> engineer find out the time used for connection re-establishment on
> kernel v5.10 is 300 times larger than v4.19, meanwhile, softirq
> monopolize almost 99% of CPU. This problem stem from that the connection
> between Sender and Receiver node get lost, the NIC driver on Sender node
> will keep raising NET_TX softirq before connection recovery. The system
> log show that most of softirq is performed from __local_bh_enable_ip(),
> since __local_bh_enable_ip is used widley in kernel code, it is very
> easy to run out most of CPU, and the user-mode application can't obtain
> enough CPU cycles to establish connection as soon as possible.

Shouldn't you fix that bug instead?  This seems like papering over the
bad effects of a bug and would make it harder to find bugs like this in
the future.  Essentially, it's the same as a screaming hardware interrupt,
except that it's a software interrupt, so we can fix the bug instead of
working around broken hardware.