From: "Rangoju, Raju" <raju.rangoju@amd.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com,
davem@davemloft.net, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch,
Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] amd-xgbe: schedule NAPI on Rx Buffer Unavailable to prevent RX stalls
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2025 07:04:10 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b37d8fa8-04ba-409a-b79b-ebe3b3a76229@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251128103853.3e6f7996@kernel.org>
On 11/29/2025 12:08 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
>
>
> On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 11:20:09 +0530 Rangoju, Raju wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2025 15:41:11 +0530 Raju Rangoju wrote:
>>>> When Rx Buffer Unavailable (RBU) interrupt is asserted, the device can
>>>> stall under load and suffer prolonged receive starvation if polling is
>>>> not initiated. Treat RBU as a wakeup source and schedule the appropriate
>>>> NAPI instance (per-channel or global) to promptly recover from buffer
>>>> shortages and refill descriptors.
>>>
>>> You need to say more.. Under heavy load network devices will routinely
>>> run out of Rx buffers, it's expected if Rx processing is slower than
>>> the network. What hw condition and scenario exactly are you describing
>>> here?
>>
>> During the bi-directional traffic device is running out of RX buffers,
>> it could be because of slower rx processing. HW notifies this via Rx
>> Buffer Unavailable (RBU) interrupt. What is being described above is
>> that, driver should treat RBU interrupt as source to trigger the NAPI
>> poll immediately, rather than waiting for regular rx interrupts to
>> process the rx buffers.
>
> Ack, all I'm saying is that the commit message seems to be overselling
> the impact of this change. Patch is very very unlikely to make anything
> more "prompt". 99% of the time if Rx buffers are not refilled we are
> either in OOM or Rx overload, so either we won't be able to alloc the
> buffers, or NAPI is already scheduled. But of course trying to schedule
> the NAPI does seem like the more correct reaction, in case we missed an
> IRQ or such. Maybe rephrase a little.. unless there's some magic here
> im not aware of
There's no magic as such. The patch is all about trying to schedule the
NAPI when an RBU interrupt is received. I'll rephrase the message. Thx.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-29 1:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-24 10:11 [PATCH net-next] amd-xgbe: schedule NAPI on Rx Buffer Unavailable to prevent RX stalls Raju Rangoju
2025-11-27 3:13 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-11-28 5:50 ` Rangoju, Raju
2025-11-28 18:38 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-11-29 1:34 ` Rangoju, Raju [this message]
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=b37d8fa8-04ba-409a-b79b-ebe3b3a76229@amd.com \
--to=raju.rangoju@amd.com \
--cc=Shyam-sundar.S-k@amd.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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.