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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <e3490755-35ac-89b4-b0fa-b63720a9a5c9@redhat.com>
 <CACGkMEv1B9xFE7-LrLQC3FbH6CxTZC+toHXoLHFvJWn6wgobrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230724025720-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <CACGkMEs7zTXk77h-v_ORhvbtQ4FgehY6w6xCfFeVTeCnzChYkw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230725033506-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <CACGkMEuAHeA4SqFCzY2v0EFcL9J07msXgDO-jTAWVy6OXzs=hA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230726073453-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <CACGkMEv+CYD3SqmWkay1qVaC8-FQTDpC05Y+3AkmQtJwLMLUjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230727020930-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <CACGkMEuEFG-vT0xqddRAn2=V+4kayVG7NFVpB96vmecy0TLOWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230727054300-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <CACGkMEvbm1LmwpiOzE0mCt6YKHsDy5zYv9fdLhcKBPaPOzLmpA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACGkMEvbm1LmwpiOzE0mCt6YKHsDy5zYv9fdLhcKBPaPOzLmpA@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Aug 2023 10:30:56 +0800
Message-ID: <CACGkMEs6ambtfdS+X_9LF7yCKqmwL73yjtD_UabTcdQDFiF3XA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 2/2] virtio-net: add cond_resched() to the
 command waiting loop
To:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc:     Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
        Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@amd.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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 2:30=E2=80=AFPM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> wr=
ote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 5:46=E2=80=AFPM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.co=
m> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 04:59:33PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > They really shouldn't - any NIC that takes forever to
> > > > program will create issues in the networking stack.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, it's not rare as the device/cvq could be implemented
> > > via firmware or software.
> >
> > Currently that mean one either has sane firmware with a scheduler that
> > can meet deadlines, or loses ability to report errors back.
> >
> > > > But if they do they can always set this flag too.
> > >
> > > This may have false negatives and may confuse the management.
> > >
> > > Maybe we can extend the networking core to allow some device specific
> > > configurations to be done with device specific lock without rtnl. For
> > > example, split the set_channels to
> > >
> > > pre_set_channels
> > > set_channels
> > > post_set_channels
> > >
> > > The device specific part could be done in pre and post without a rtnl=
 lock?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> >
> >
> > Would the benefit be that errors can be reported to userspace then?
> > Then maybe.  I think you will have to show how this works for at least
> > one card besides virtio.
>
> Even for virtio, this seems not easy, as e.g the
> virtnet_send_command() and netif_set_real_num_tx_queues() need to
> appear to be atomic to the networking core.
>
> I wonder if we can re-consider the way of a timeout here and choose a
> sane value as a start.

Michael, any more input on this?

Thanks

>
> Thanks
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > MST
> >