All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
To: Sahil Chandna <sahilchandna@linux.microsoft.com>
Cc: haiyangz@microsoft.com, wei.liu@kernel.org, decui@microsoft.com,
	 andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@kernel.org,
	kuba@kernel.org,  pabeni@redhat.com, weh@microsoft.com,
	kotaranov@microsoft.com, horms@kernel.org,
	 ernis@linux.microsoft.com, gargaditya@linux.microsoft.com,
	linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org,  netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: mana: Add CQE polling as first-level TX timeout recovery
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2026 02:16:24 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <avbdPt1WSC9qEuYw@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fc2ae552-86ee-40af-a997-454c2d3b176d@linux.microsoft.com>

On Fri, Nov 13, 2026 at 02:04:08PM +0530, Sahil Chandna wrote:
> On 12-11-2026 17:37, Breno Leitao wrote:
> > Hello Sahil,
> > 
> > On Thu, Nov 12, 2026 at 04:57:18AM -0600, Sahil Chandna wrote:
> >> Implement a graduated recovery approach: on the first TX timeout (or
> >> when the previous timeout was more than 2 minutes ago), schedule NAPI on
> >> the stalled queue's TX CQ via napi_schedule(). This triggers
> >> mana_poll_tx_cq() through the normal NAPI path, processing any pending
> >> completions without relying on the interrupt and recovering
> >> missed-interrupt scenarios without queue reset.
> > 
> > Which interrupt is being missed here?
> > 
> Hi Breno,
> 
> It is the TX CQ completion interrupt. After NAPI finishes, it re-arms
> the TX CQ. When a new CQE arrives, the hardware post EQE, which raises
> the MSI-X and schedules NAPI. If that notification for the TX CQ is lost
> , NAPI never runs for the TX CQ and pending_sends never drains and the
> queue stays stopped,  so napi_schedule() polls the CQ, reaps the CQEs
> and re-arms it.

Thanks.  Which one gets lost, the EQE or the MSI-X?

> >> If any subsequent TX timeout fires on any queue, within 2 minutes of
> >> the previous one, escalate to the existing port-level detach/attach
> >> reset, as the CQE poll did not recover the queue.
> > 
> > How was 2 minutes chosen? mana sets watchdog_timeo to 15 * HZ, no?
> The watchdog_timeo is TX stall timeout setting i.e if a queue remains
> stalled for this much time, it trigger watchdog timeout. Here, 2 minute
> is not timeout/wait. The 2 minutes here is for deciding whether a new
> queue stall event is a repeat of the previous incident or a new,
> unrelated one that should get the cheap poll first. For e.g. if a queue
> gets stalled, 15 * HZ sec later, timeout occurs and this patch trigger
> manual NAPI, if another stall occurs (it can be on any queue) within 2
> minutes of last one, the existing recovery mechanism of mana
> detach/attach will be tried.The patch is adding a first level less
> destructive recovery first.
> For selecting 2 minutes, I do not have any hardware basis for it afaik,
> but I can confirm and check with our host team as well.

So the goal is to tell an isolated stall from a wider problem.

A port-wide timestamp only approximates that. It cannot tell the same
queue from another one, and since dev_watchdog() reports one queue per
run, two queues that stall together show up ~15s apart: the first gets
a kick, the second gets the port reset anyway, no?

Could mana_tx_timeout() check this directly? Look at the other TX queues
the way dev_watchdog() does (stopped, with trans_start older than
watchdog_timeo). If more than one is stalled, reset right away.

Otherwise kick this queue, and reset if the same queue times out again
within a couple of watchdog periods, as gve_tx_timeout_try_q_kick()
does. That also gets rid of the 2 minutes.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-11-13 10:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-11-12 10:57 [PATCH net-next] net: mana: Add CQE polling as first-level TX timeout recovery Sahil Chandna
2026-11-12 12:07 ` Breno Leitao
2026-11-13  8:34   ` Sahil Chandna
2026-11-13 10:16     ` Breno Leitao [this message]
2026-11-13 10:58 ` sashiko-bot

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=avbdPt1WSC9qEuYw@gmail.com \
    --to=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=decui@microsoft.com \
    --cc=edumazet@kernel.org \
    --cc=ernis@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=gargaditya@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=haiyangz@microsoft.com \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=kotaranov@microsoft.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=sahilchandna@linux.microsoft.com \
    --cc=weh@microsoft.com \
    --cc=wei.liu@kernel.org \
    /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.