From: Timo Teras <timo.teras@iki.fi>
To: Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: r8169 rx_missed increasing in bursts (regression)
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 11:58:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130109115850.055b7a7e@vostro> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130108225833.GA4193@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 23:58:33 +0100 Francois Romieu
<romieu@fr.zoreil.com> wrote:
> Timo Teras <timo.teras@iki.fi> :
> [...]
> > My current hypothesis is that due to high softirq and recent(ish)
> > commit da78dbf "r8169: remove work from irq handler" moving more
> > work to softirq makes the receive path now suffer from latency from
> > getting irq to reading packets from the NIC on these boxes. And
> > that at times the rx fifo can get full causing a missed packet or
> > so.
>
> This hypothesis won't explain the regression in 3.3.8 since 3.3.x does
> not include commit da78dbf.
>
> Do you notice any netdev watchdog message in dmesg ?
In production boxes. No.
The lab environment where we tried to reproduce this, we received:
NOHZ: local_softirq_pending 08
Which is likely related, but separate issue. And fixed by commit
da78dbf. So seems that just got upgraded to "regression fix".
> 'perf top' may exhibit something unusual too.
Will try this.
I did notice that:
/proc/net/softnet_stat's 3rd field aka. softnet_data.time_squeeze keeps
incrementing when ever rx_missed increases. Sometiems time_squeeze
increments on it own. But rx_missed never increases without time_squeeze
bumping up seriously too.
> > This might be further escalated by the bug fixed in commit 7dbb491
> > "r8169: avoid NAPI scheduling delay" (which is not present in
> > -stable trees).
>
> Right, it would had been worth adding to -stable.
>
> However it only 1) is a problem for 3.4.x (fixed in 3.5) and 2)
> triggers when returning from the slow work thread - which should not
> be used much.
Ok. Didn't realize 3.3.x did not include it. So something else is broke
too.
The slow thread handles the RxOverflow, and in rx_missed case is taken
relatively often. Maybe add a printk there.
> [...]
> > So would it be sensible to do something like:
> > -#define NUM_RX_DESC 256 /* Number of Rx descriptor
> > registers */ +#define NUM_RX_DESC 512 /* Number of Rx
> > descriptor registers */
>
> You can try it but it may actually increase the amount of heavy work
> done in softirq.
Ok. Will try this and some other things along with added debug logging.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-09 9:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-08 8:28 r8169 rx_missed increasing in bursts (regression) Timo Teras
2013-01-08 22:58 ` Francois Romieu
2013-01-09 9:58 ` Timo Teras [this message]
2013-01-09 17:14 ` Timo Teras
2013-01-15 8:11 ` Timo Teras
2013-01-15 22:53 ` Francois Romieu
2013-01-16 7:01 ` [PATCH] r8169: remove unneeded dirty_rx index Timo Teräs
2013-01-16 21:25 ` David Miller
2013-01-16 21:26 ` Francois Romieu
2013-01-16 22:16 ` Francois Romieu
2013-01-16 23:02 ` David Miller
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=20130109115850.055b7a7e@vostro \
--to=timo.teras@iki.fi \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=romieu@fr.zoreil.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 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).