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: <1683338663.2120674-1-xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] virtio_net: suppress cpu stall when free_unused_bufs
Date:   Sat, 6 May 2023 10:04:23 +0800
From:   Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc:     mst@redhat.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com,
        kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com,
        willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Wenliang Wang <wangwenliang.1995@bytedance.com>
References: <1683167226-7012-1-git-send-email-wangwenliang.1995@bytedance.com>
 <CACGkMEs_4kUzc6iSBWvhZA1+U70Pp0o+WhE0aQnC-5pECW7QXA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACGkMEs_4kUzc6iSBWvhZA1+U70Pp0o+WhE0aQnC-5pECW7QXA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 5 May 2023 11:28:25 +0800, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 10:27=E2=80=AFAM Wenliang Wang
> <wangwenliang.1995@bytedance.com> wrote:
> >
> > For multi-queue and large ring-size use case, the following error
> > occurred when free_unused_bufs:
> > rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU.
> >
> > Fixes: 986a4f4d452d ("virtio_net: multiqueue support")
> > Signed-off-by: Wenliang Wang <wangwenliang.1995@bytedance.com>
> > ---
> > v2:
> > -add need_resched check.
> > -apply same logic to sq.
> > v3:
> > -use cond_resched instead.
> > v4:
> > -add fixes tag
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > index 8d8038538fc4..a12ae26db0e2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > @@ -3560,12 +3560,14 @@ static void free_unused_bufs(struct virtnet_inf=
o *vi)
> >                 struct virtqueue *vq =3D vi->sq[i].vq;
> >                 while ((buf =3D virtqueue_detach_unused_buf(vq)) !=3D N=
ULL)
> >                         virtnet_sq_free_unused_buf(vq, buf);
> > +               cond_resched();
>
> Does this really address the case when the virtqueue is very large?

Yes, I also have this question. I think cond_resched() should be called eve=
ry
time a certain number of buffers are processed.

Thanks.

>
> Thanks
>
> >         }
> >
> >         for (i =3D 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
> >                 struct virtqueue *vq =3D vi->rq[i].vq;
> >                 while ((buf =3D virtqueue_detach_unused_buf(vq)) !=3D N=
ULL)
> >                         virtnet_rq_free_unused_buf(vq, buf);
> > +               cond_resched();
> >         }
> >  }
> >
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >
>