linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	sassmann@redhat.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	stable-rt@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Treat __napi_schedule_irqoff() as __napi_schedule() on PREEMPT_RT
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 11:56:49 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210514115649.6c84fdc3@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87k0o360zx.ffs@nanos.tec.linutronix.de>

On Thu, 13 May 2021 00:28:02 +0200 Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, May 12 2021 at 23:43, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > __napi_schedule_irqoff() is an optimized version of __napi_schedule()
> > which can be used where it is known that interrupts are disabled,
> > e.g. in interrupt-handlers, spin_lock_irq() sections or hrtimer
> > callbacks.
> >
> > On PREEMPT_RT enabled kernels this assumptions is not true. Force-
> > threaded interrupt handlers and spinlocks are not disabling interrupts
> > and the NAPI hrtimer callback is forced into softirq context which runs
> > with interrupts enabled as well.
> >
> > Chasing all usage sites of __napi_schedule_irqoff() is a whack-a-mole
> > game so make __napi_schedule_irqoff() invoke __napi_schedule() for
> > PREEMPT_RT kernels.
> >
> > The callers of ____napi_schedule() in the networking core have been
> > audited and are correct on PREEMPT_RT kernels as well.
> >
> > Reported-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>  
> 
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> > ---
> > Alternatively __napi_schedule_irqoff() could be #ifdef'ed out on RT and
> > an inline provided which invokes __napi_schedule().
> >
> > This was not chosen as it creates #ifdeffery all over the place and with
> > the proposed solution the code reflects the documentation consistently
> > and in one obvious place.  
> 
> Blame me for that decision.
> 
> No matter which variant we end up with, this needs to go into all stable
> RT kernels ASAP.

Mumble mumble. I thought we concluded that drivers used on RT can be
fixed, we've already done it for a couple drivers (by which I mean two).
If all the IRQ handler is doing is scheduling NAPI (which it is for
modern NICs) - IRQF_NO_THREAD seems like the right option.

Is there any driver you care about that we can convert to using
IRQF_NO_THREAD so we can have new drivers to "do the right thing"
while the old ones depend on this workaround for now?


Another thing while I have your attention - ____napi_schedule() does
__raise_softirq_irqoff() which AFAIU does not wake the ksoftirq thread.
On non-RT we get occasional NOHZ warnings when drivers schedule napi
from process context, but on RT this is even more of a problem, right?
ksoftirqd won't run until something else actually wakes it up?

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-05-14 18:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-11  6:09 [RT] Question about i40e threaded irq Juri Lelli
2021-05-11  6:24 ` Stefan Assmann
2021-05-11  7:46 ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-05-12 21:43 ` [PATCH net-next] net: Treat __napi_schedule_irqoff() as __napi_schedule() on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2021-05-12 22:28   ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-05-13  0:50     ` Steven Rostedt
2021-05-13 16:43       ` Steven Rostedt
2021-05-14 12:11         ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-05-14 18:56     ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2021-05-14 19:44       ` Alison Chaiken
2021-05-14 21:53         ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-05-14 20:16       ` Thomas Gleixner
2021-05-14 20:38         ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-05-13  5:12   ` Juri Lelli
2021-05-13 20:20   ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=20210514115649.6c84fdc3@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sassmann@redhat.com \
    --cc=stable-rt@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Treat __napi_schedule_irqoff() as __napi_schedule() on PREEMPT_RT' \
    /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

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).