Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <d32101bb-783f-dbd1-545a-be291c27cb63@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Sep 2022 10:21:45 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.13.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] virtio-net: add cond_resched() to the command waiting
 loop
Content-Language: en-US
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        virtualization <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Gautam Dawar <gautam.dawar@xilinx.com>,
        davem <davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20220905045341.66191-1-jasowang@redhat.com>
 <20220905031405-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
 <CACGkMEtjQ0Jfok-gcRW+kuinsua2X0TscyTNfBJoXHny0Yob+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <056ba905a2579903a372258383afdf6579767ad0.camel@redhat.com>
 <CACGkMEuiDqqOEKUWRN9LvQKv8Jz4mi3aSZMwbhUsJkZp=C-0RQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <c9180ac41b00543e3531a343afae8f5bdca64d8d.camel@redhat.com>
 <20220907034407-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220907034407-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


在 2022/9/7 15:46, Michael S. Tsirkin 写道:
> On Wed, Sep 07, 2022 at 09:07:20AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> On Wed, 2022-09-07 at 10:09 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 6:56 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2022-09-05 at 15:49 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Sep 5, 2022 at 3:15 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 05, 2022 at 12:53:41PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>>>> Adding cond_resched() to the command waiting loop for a better
>>>>>>> co-operation with the scheduler. This allows to give CPU a breath to
>>>>>>> run other task(workqueue) instead of busy looping when preemption is
>>>>>>> not allowed.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's more important. This is a must for some vDPA parent to work
>>>>>>> since control virtqueue is emulated via a workqueue for those parents.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Fixes: bda324fd037a ("vdpasim: control virtqueue support")
>>>>>> That's a weird commit to fix. so it fixes the simulator?
>>>>> Yes, since the simulator is using a workqueue to handle control virtueue.
>>>> Uhmm... touching a driver for a simulator's sake looks a little weird.
>>> Simulator is not the only one that is using a workqueue (but should be
>>> the first).
>>>
>>> I can see  that the mlx5 vDPA driver is using a workqueue as well (see
>>> mlx5_vdpa_kick_vq()).
>>>
>>> And in the case of VDUSE, it needs to wait for the response from the
>>> userspace, this means cond_resched() is probably a must for the case
>>> like UP.
>>>
>>>> Additionally, if the bug is vdpasim, I think it's better to try to
>>>> solve it there, if possible.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at vdpasim_net_work() and vdpasim_blk_work() it looks like
>>>> neither needs a process context, so perhaps you could rework it to run
>>>> the work_fn() directly from vdpasim_kick_vq(), at least for the control
>>>> virtqueue?
>>> It's possible (but require some rework on the simulator core). But
>>> considering we have other similar use cases, it looks better to solve
>>> it in the virtio-net driver.
>> I see.
>>
>>> Additionally, this may have better behaviour when using for the buggy
>>> hardware (e.g the control virtqueue takes too long to respond). We may
>>> consider switching to use interrupt/sleep in the future (but not
>>> suitable for -net).
>> Agreed. Possibly a timeout could be useful, too.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Paolo
>
> Hmm timeouts are kind of arbitrary.
> regular drivers basically derive them from hardware
> behaviour but with a generic driver like virtio it's harder.
> I guess we could add timeout as a config field, have
> device make a promise to the driver.
>
> Making the wait interruptible seems more reasonable.


Yes, but I think we still need this patch for -net and -stable.

Thanks


>