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: <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>
 <CACGkMEs6ambtfdS+X_9LF7yCKqmwL73yjtD_UabTcdQDFiF3XA@mail.gmail.com> <20230810153744-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230810153744-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 11 Aug 2023 10:23:15 +0800
Message-ID: <CACGkMEvVg0KFMcYoKx0ZCCEABsP4TrQCJOUqTn6oHO4Q3aEJ4w@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 Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 3:41=E2=80=AFAM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>=
 wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2023 at 10:30:56AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 2:30=E2=80=AFPM Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com=
> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 5:46=E2=80=AFPM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redha=
t.com> 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 implement=
ed
> > > > > via firmware or software.
> > > >
> > > > Currently that mean one either has sane firmware with a scheduler t=
hat
> > > > 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 spec=
ific
> > > > > 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 le=
ast
> > > > 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
>
> I think this is just mission creep. We are trying to fix
> vduse - let's do that for starters.
>
> Recovering from firmware timeouts is far from trivial and
> just assuming that just because it timed out it will not
> access memory is just as likely to cause memory corruption
> with worse results than an infinite spin.

Yes, this might require support not only in the driver

>
> I propose we fix this for vduse and assume hardware/firmware
> is well behaved.

One major case is the re-connection, in that case it might take
whatever longer that the kernel virito-net driver expects.

So we can have a timeout in VDUSE and trap CVQ then VDUSE can return
and fail early?

> Or maybe not well behaved firmware will
> set the flag losing error reporting ability.

This might be hard since it means not only the set but also the get is
unreliable.

Thanks

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