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: <263a5ad7-1189-3be3-70de-c38a685bebe0@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 21 Jul 2023 16:37:00 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/2] virtio-net: add cond_resched() to the
 command waiting loop
Content-Language: en-US
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
        Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@amd.com>
Cc:     Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>, xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, edumazet@google.com,
        kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, davem@davemloft.net
References: <20230720083839.481487-1-jasowang@redhat.com>
 <20230720083839.481487-3-jasowang@redhat.com>
 <e4eb0162-d303-b17c-a71d-ca3929380b31@amd.com>
 <20230720170001-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
From:   Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230720170001-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 7/20/23 23:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 01:26:20PM -0700, Shannon Nelson wrote:
>> On 7/20/23 1:38 AM, 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 on a device whose CVQ might be slow.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>>
>> This still leaves hung processes, but at least it doesn't pin the CPU any
>> more.  Thanks.
>> Reviewed-by: Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@amd.com>
>>
> 
> I'd like to see a full solution
> 1- block until interrupt

Would it make sense to also have a timeout?
And when timeout expires, set FAILED bit in device status?

> 2- still handle surprise removal correctly by waking in that case
> 
> 
> 
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 4 +++-
>>>    1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>>> index 9f3b1d6ac33d..e7533f29b219 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>>> @@ -2314,8 +2314,10 @@ static bool virtnet_send_command(struct virtnet_info *vi, u8 class, u8 cmd,
>>>            * into the hypervisor, so the request should be handled immediately.
>>>            */
>>>           while (!virtqueue_get_buf(vi->cvq, &tmp) &&
>>> -              !virtqueue_is_broken(vi->cvq))
>>> +              !virtqueue_is_broken(vi->cvq)) {
>>> +               cond_resched();
>>>                   cpu_relax();
>>> +       }
>>>
>>>           return vi->ctrl->status == VIRTIO_NET_OK;
>>>    }
>>> --
>>> 2.39.3
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Virtualization mailing list
>>> Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
>>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
>