From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754651Ab2LCK6B (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Dec 2012 05:58:01 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:14021 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751340Ab2LCK57 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Dec 2012 05:57:59 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 13:00:37 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Jason Wang Cc: rusty@rustcorp.com.au, krkumar2@in.ibm.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, bhutchings@solarflare.com, jwhan@filewood.snu.ac.kr, shiyer@redhat.com Subject: Re: [net-next rfc v7 2/3] virtio_net: multiqueue support Message-ID: <20121203110037.GA26167@redhat.com> References: <1354011360-39479-1-git-send-email-jasowang@redhat.com> <1354011360-39479-3-git-send-email-jasowang@redhat.com> <20121203101436.GB23009@redhat.com> <50BC7F59.301@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50BC7F59.301@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Dec 03, 2012 at 06:30:49PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > On 12/03/2012 06:14 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 06:15:59PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > >> > - if (!try_fill_recv(&vi->rq, GFP_KERNEL)) > >> > - schedule_delayed_work(&vi->rq.refill, 0); > >> > + for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) > >> > + if (!try_fill_recv(&vi->rq[i], GFP_KERNEL)) > >> > + schedule_delayed_work(&vi->rq[i].refill, 0); > >> > > >> > mutex_lock(&vi->config_lock); > >> > vi->config_enable = true; > >> > mutex_unlock(&vi->config_lock); > >> > > >> > + BUG_ON(virtnet_set_queues(vi)); > >> > + > >> > return 0; > >> > } > >> > #endif > > Also crashing on device nack of command is also not nice. > > In this case it seems we can just switch to > > single-queue mode which should always be safe. > > Not sure it's safe. It depends on the reason why this call fails. If we > left a state that the driver only use single queue but the device use > multi queues, we may still lost the network. Not the way driver is currently written - you'll happily process incoming packets from all queues so no problem? -- MST