From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sander Eikelenboom Subject: Re: Xen-unstable Linux 3.14-rc3 and 3.13 Network troubles "bisected" Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 11:05:16 +0100 Message-ID: <457222418.20140327110516__26003.6758998924$1395914818$gmane$org@eikelenboom.it> References: <1744594108.20140318162127@eikelenboom.it> <20140318160412.GB16807@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1701035622.20140318211402@eikelenboom.it> <722971844.20140318221859@eikelenboom.it> <1688396550.20140319001104@eikelenboom.it> <20140319113532.GD16807@zion.uk.xensource.com> <246793256.20140319220752@eikelenboom.it> <20140321164958.GA31766@zion.uk.xensource.com> <1334202265.20140321182727@eikelenboom.it> <1056661597.20140322192834@eikelenboom.it> <20140325151539.GG31766@zion.uk.xensource.com> <79975567.20140325162942@eikelenboom.it> <1972209744.20140326121116@eikelenboom.it> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029AD94@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <1715463578.20140326162245@eikelenboom.it> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029AFC1@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <799579453.20140326170641@eikelenboom.it> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029B106@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <789809468.20140326175352@eikelenboom.it> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029B277@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <966386043.20140326183304@eikelenboom.it> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029B350@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <1959698732.20140326190752@eikelenboom.it> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029B49C@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> <103668635.20140326211744@eikelenboom.it> <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029BF83@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <9AAE0902D5BC7E449B7C8E4E778ABCD029BF83@AMSPEX01CL01.citrite.net> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Paul Durrant Cc: Wei Liu , Ian Campbell , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , linux-kernel , "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" , annie li , Zoltan Kiss List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hrmm i don't know if it's your mailer or my mailer .. but i seem to get a lot of your mails truncated somehow :S though the xen-devel list archive seem to have them in complete form .. so it's probably my mailer tripping over something > I'll come up with some patches shortly. OK will test them ASAP. Thursday, March 27, 2014, 10:54:09 AM, you wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sander Eikelenboom [mailto:linux@eikelenboom.it] >> Sent: 26 March 2014 20:18 >> To: Paul Durrant >> Cc: Wei Liu; annie li; Zoltan Kiss; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Ian Campbell; linux- >> kernel; netdev@vger.kernel.org >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen-unstable Linux 3.14-rc3 and 3.13 Network >> troubles "bisected" >> >> >> Wednesday, March 26, 2014, 7:15:30 PM, you wrote: >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: Sander Eikelenboom [mailto:linux@eikelenboom.it] >> >> Sent: 26 March 2014 18:08 >> >> To: Paul Durrant >> >> Cc: Wei Liu; annie li; Zoltan Kiss; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Ian Campbell; >> linux- >> >> kernel; netdev@vger.kernel.org >> >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen-unstable Linux 3.14-rc3 and 3.13 Network >> >> troubles "bisected" >> >> >> >> >> >> Wednesday, March 26, 2014, 6:46:06 PM, you wrote: >> >> >> >> > Re-send shortened version... >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> >> From: Sander Eikelenboom [mailto:linux@eikelenboom.it] >> >> >> Sent: 26 March 2014 16:54 >> >> >> To: Paul Durrant >> >> >> Cc: Wei Liu; annie li; Zoltan Kiss; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Ian Campbell; >> >> linux- >> >> >> kernel; netdev@vger.kernel.org >> >> >> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Xen-unstable Linux 3.14-rc3 and 3.13 Network >> >> >> troubles "bisected" >> >> >> >> >> > [snip] >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - When processing an SKB we end up in "xenvif_gop_frag_copy" >> while >> >> >> prod >> >> >> >> == cons ... but we still have bytes and size left .. >> >> >> >> - start_new_rx_buffer() has returned true .. >> >> >> >> - so we end up in get_next_rx_buffer >> >> >> >> - this does a RING_GET_REQUEST and ups cons .. >> >> >> >> - and we end up with a bad grant reference. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Sometimes we are saved by the bell .. since additional slots have >> >> become >> >> >> >> free (you see cons become > prod in "get_next_rx_buffer" but >> shortly >> >> >> after >> >> >> >> that prod is increased .. >> >> >> >> just in time to not cause a overrun). >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Ah, but hang on... There's a BUG_ON meta_slots_used > >> >> >> max_slots_needed, so if we are overflowing the worst-case calculation >> >> then >> >> >> why is that BUG_ON not firing? >> >> >> >> >> >> You mean: >> >> >> sco = (struct skb_cb_overlay *)skb->cb; >> >> >> sco->meta_slots_used = xenvif_gop_skb(skb, &npo); >> >> >> BUG_ON(sco->meta_slots_used > max_slots_needed); >> >> >> >> >> >> in "get_next_rx_buffer" ? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > That code excerpt is from net_rx_action(),isn't it? >> >> >> >> Yes >> >> >> >> >> I don't know .. at least now it doesn't crash dom0 and therefore not my >> >> >> complete machine and since tcp is recovering from a failed packet :-) >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Well, if the code calculating max_slots_needed were underestimating >> then >> >> the BUG_ON() should fire. If it is not firing in your case then this suggests >> >> your problem lies elsewhere, or that meta_slots_used is not equal to the >> >> number of ring slots consumed. >> >> >> >> It's seem to be the last .. >> >> >> >> [ 1157.188908] vif vif-7-0 vif7.0: ?!? xenvif_gop_skb Me here 5 npo- >> >> >meta_prod:40 old_meta_prod:36 vif->rx.sring->req_prod:2105867 vif- >> >> >rx.req_cons:2105868 meta->gso_type:1 meta->gso_size:1448 nr_frags:1 >> >> req->gref:657 req->id:7 estimated_slots_needed:4 j(data):1 >> >> reserved_slots_left:-1 used in funcstart: 0 + 1 .. used_dataloop:1 .. >> >> used_fragloop:3 >> >> [ 1157.244975] vif vif-7-0 vif7.0: ?!? xenvif_rx_action me here 2 .. vif- >> >> >rx.sring->req_prod:2105867 vif->rx.req_cons:2105868 sco- >> >> >meta_slots_used:4 max_upped_gso:1 skb_is_gso(skb):1 >> >> max_slots_needed:4 j:6 is_gso:1 nr_frags:1 firstpart:1 secondpart:2 >> >> reserved_slots_left:-1 >> >> >> >> net_rx_action() calculated we would need 4 slots .. and sco- >> >> >meta_slots_used == 4 when we return so it doesn't trigger you BUG_ON >> .. >> >> >> >> The 4 slots we calculated are: >> >> 1 slot for the data part: DIV_ROUND_UP(offset_in_page(skb->data) + >> >> skb_headlen(skb), PAGE_SIZE) >> >> 2 slots for the single frag in this SKB from: DIV_ROUND_UP(size, >> PAGE_SIZE) >> >> 1 slot since GSO >> >> >> >> In the debug code i annotated all cons++, and the code uses 1 slot to >> process >> >> the data from the SKB as expected but uses 3 slots in the frag chopping >> loop. >> >> And when it reaches the state were cons > prod it is always in >> >> "get_next_rx_buffer". >> >> >> >> >> But probably because "npo->copy_prod++" seems to be used for the >> >> frags .. >> >> >> and it isn't added to npo->meta_prod ? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > meta_slots_used is calculated as the value of meta_prod at return >> (from >> >> xenvif_gop_skb()) minus the value on entry , >> >> > and if you look back up the code then you can see that meta_prod is >> >> incremented every time RING_GET_REQUEST() is evaluated. >> >> > So, we must be consuming a slot without evaluating >> RING_GET_REQUEST() >> >> and I think that's exactly what's happening... >> >> > Right at the bottom of xenvif_gop_frag_copy() req_cons is simply >> >> incremented in the case of a GSO. So the BUG_ON() is indeed off by one