[PATCH net] dql: Reset the adjusted limit when resetting the queue

[PATCH net] dql: Reset the adjusted limit when resetting the queue

[Hungyu Lin]

dql_reset() resets limit and clears the cumulative queue and completion
counts, but leaves adj_limit from the previous queue lifetime. Since
dql_avail() subtracts num_queued from adj_limit, BQL flow control and
qdisc bulk dequeue can use stale credit after a network queue reset,
until the next completion updates adj_limit.

Reset adj_limit to the new limit as well. With num_completed reset to
zero, this restores the documented adj_limit = limit + num_completed
relationship and makes the configured minimum effective immediately.

Fixes: 75957ba36c05 ("dql: Dynamic queue limits")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Hungyu Lin <dennylin0707@gmail.com>
---
 lib/dynamic_queue_limits.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/lib/dynamic_queue_limits.c b/lib/dynamic_queue_limits.c
index f97a752e900a..acef6a35ba3d 100644
--- a/lib/dynamic_queue_limits.c
+++ b/lib/dynamic_queue_limits.c
@@ -191,6 +191,7 @@ void dql_reset(struct dql *dql)
 {
 	/* Reset all dynamic values */
 	dql->limit = dql->min_limit;
+	dql->adj_limit = dql->limit;
 	dql->num_queued = 0;
 	dql->num_completed = 0;
 	dql->last_obj_cnt = 0;
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH net] dql: Reset the adjusted limit when resetting the queue

[netdev-bot+sinfo]

Hi!

This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its
commit messages seem to be missing some information:

 - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during
   development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static
   analysis tool scan.

 - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical
   (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include
   the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages.

Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead,
reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers
can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for
other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages
then.

The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think
that is the case please reply and explain.