All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org,
	petrm@nvidia.com, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
	mlxsw@nvidia.com, saeedm@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/2] net: devlink: remove devlink big lock
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:25:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YrworZb5yNdnMFDI@nanopsycho> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrqxHpvSuEkc45uM@shredder>

Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 09:43:26AM CEST, idosch@nvidia.com wrote:
>On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 05:55:06PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 05:41:31PM CEST, idosch@nvidia.com wrote:
>> >On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 03:54:59PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>
>> >> 
>> >> This is an attempt to remove use of devlink_mutex. This is a global lock
>> >> taken for every user command. That causes that long operations performed
>> >> on one devlink instance (like flash update) are blocking other
>> >> operations on different instances.
>> >
>> >This patchset is supposed to prevent one devlink instance from blocking
>> >another? Devlink does not enable "parallel_ops", which means that the
>> >generic netlink mutex is serializing all user space operations. AFAICT,
>> >this series does not enable "parallel_ops", so I'm not sure what
>> >difference the removal of the devlink mutex makes.
>> 
>> You are correct, that is missing. For me, as a side effect this patchset
>> resolved the deadlock for LC auxdev you pointed out. That was my
>> motivation for this patchset :)
>
>Given that devlink does not enable "parallel_ops" and that the generic
>netlink mutex is held throughout all callbacks, what prevents you from
>simply dropping the devlink mutex now? IOW, why can't this series be
>patch #1 and another patch that removes the devlink mutex?

Yep, I think you are correct. We are currently working with Moshe on
conversion of commands that does not late devlink->lock (like health
reporters and reload) to take devlink->lock. Once we have that, we can
enable parallel_ops.

>
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> >The devlink mutex (in accordance with the comment above it) serializes
>> >all user space operations and accesses to the devlink devices list. This
>> >resulted in a AA deadlock in the previous submission because we had a
>> >flow where a user space operation (which acquires this mutex) also tries
>> >to register / unregister a nested devlink instance which also tries to
>> >acquire the mutex.
>> >
>> >As long as devlink does not implement "parallel_ops", it seems that the
>> >devlink mutex can be reduced to only serializing accesses to the devlink
>> >devices list, thereby eliminating the deadlock.
>> >
>> >> 
>> >> The first patch makes sure that the xarray that holds devlink pointers
>> >> is possible to be safely iterated.
>> >> 
>> >> The second patch moves the user command mutex to be per-devlink.
>> >> 
>> >> Jiri Pirko (2):
>> >>   net: devlink: make sure that devlink_try_get() works with valid
>> >>     pointer during xarray iteration
>> >>   net: devlink: replace devlink_mutex by per-devlink lock
>> >> 
>> >>  net/core/devlink.c | 256 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>> >>  1 file changed, 161 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-)
>> >> 
>> >> -- 
>> >> 2.35.3
>> >> 

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-29 10:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-27 13:54 [patch net-next RFC 0/2] net: devlink: remove devlink big lock Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 13:55 ` [patch net-next RFC 1/2] net: devlink: make sure that devlink_try_get() works with valid pointer during xarray iteration Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 13:55 ` [patch net-next RFC 2/2] net: devlink: replace devlink_mutex by per-devlink lock Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 15:41 ` [patch net-next RFC 0/2] net: devlink: remove devlink big lock Ido Schimmel
2022-06-27 15:55   ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-28  7:43     ` Ido Schimmel
2022-06-29 10:25       ` Jiri Pirko [this message]
2022-06-29 10:36         ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-29 11:30           ` Ido Schimmel
2022-06-29 11:47             ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 17:49   ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-06-28  6:32     ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-28  7:04       ` Jiri Pirko

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YrworZb5yNdnMFDI@nanopsycho \
    --to=jiri@resnulli.us \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=idosch@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=mlxsw@nvidia.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=petrm@nvidia.com \
    --cc=saeedm@nvidia.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.