From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>, Wei Wang <weiwan@google.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] virtio: fix up virtio_disable_cb
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2021 18:11:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210413180830-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+FuTSd7qagJAN0wpvudvi2Rvxn-SvQaBZ1SU9rwdb1x0j1s3g@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 05:44:42PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 3:54 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10:01:11AM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 1:47 AM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > virtio_disable_cb is currently a nop for split ring with event index.
> > > > This is because it used to be always called from a callback when we know
> > > > device won't trigger more events until we update the index. However,
> > > > now that we run with interrupts enabled a lot we also poll without a
> > > > callback so that is different: disabling callbacks will help reduce the
> > > > number of spurious interrupts.
> > >
> > > The device may poll for transmit completions as a result of an interrupt
> > > from virtnet_poll_tx.
> > >
> > > As well as asynchronously to this transmit interrupt, from start_xmit or
> > > from virtnet_poll_cleantx as a result of a receive interrupt.
> > >
> > > As of napi-tx, transmit interrupts are left enabled to operate in standard
> > > napi mode. While previously they would be left disabled for most of the
> > > time, enabling only when the queue as low on descriptors.
> > >
> > > (in practice, for the at the time common case of split ring with event index,
> > > little changed, as that mode does not actually enable/disable the interrupt,
> > > but looks at the consumer index in the ring to decide whether to interrupt)
> > >
> > > Combined, this may cause the following:
> > >
> > > 1. device sends a packet and fires transmit interrupt
> > > 2. driver cleans interrupts using virtnet_poll_cleantx
> > > 3. driver handles transmit interrupt using vring_interrupt,
> > > detects that the vring is empty: !more_used(vq),
> > > and records a spurious interrupt.
> > >
> > > I don't quite follow how suppressing interrupt suppression, i.e.,
> > > skipping disable_cb, helps avoid this.
> > > I'm probably missing something. Is this solving a subtly different
> > > problem from the one as I understand it?
> >
> > I was thinking of this one:
> >
> > 1. device is sending packets
> > 2. driver cleans them at the same time using virtnet_poll_cleantx
> > 3. device fires transmit interrupts
> > 4. driver handles transmit interrupts using vring_interrupt,
> > detects that the vring is empty: !more_used(vq),
> > and records spurious interrupts.
>
> I think that's the same scenario
Not a big difference I agree.
> >
> >
> > but even yours is also fixed I think.
> >
> > The common point is that a single spurious interrupt is not a problem.
> > The problem only exists if there are tons of spurious interrupts with no
> > real ones. For this to trigger, we keep polling the ring and while we do
> > device keeps firing interrupts. So just disable interrupts while we
> > poll.
>
> But the main change in this patch is to turn some virtqueue_disable_cb
> calls into no-ops.
Well this was not the design. This is the main change:
@@ -739,7 +742,10 @@ static void virtqueue_disable_cb_split(struct virtqueue *_vq)
if (!(vq->split.avail_flags_shadow & VRING_AVAIL_F_NO_INTERRUPT)) {
vq->split.avail_flags_shadow |= VRING_AVAIL_F_NO_INTERRUPT;
- if (!vq->event)
+ if (vq->event)
+ /* TODO: this is a hack. Figure out a cleaner value to write. */
+ vring_used_event(&vq->split.vring) = 0x0;
+ else
vq->split.vring.avail->flags =
cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev,
vq->split.avail_flags_shadow);
IIUC previously when event index was enabled (vq->event) virtqueue_disable_cb_split
was a nop. Now it sets index to 0x0 (which is a hack, but good enough
for testing I think).
> I don't understand how that helps reduce spurious
> interrupts, as if anything, it keeps interrupts enabled for longer.
>
> Another patch in the series disable callbacks* before starting to
> clean the descriptors from the rx interrupt. That I do understand will
> suppress additional tx interrupts that might see no work to be done. I
> just don't entire follow this patch on its own.
>
> *(I use interrupt and callback as a synonym in this context, correct
> me if I'm glancing over something essential)
It's the same for the pci transport.
--
MST
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-13 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-13 5:47 [PATCH RFC v2 0/4] virtio net: spurious interrupt related fixes Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 5:47 ` [PATCH RFC v2 1/4] virtio: fix up virtio_disable_cb Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 8:51 ` Jason Wang
2021-04-13 14:01 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-04-13 19:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 21:44 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-04-13 22:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2021-04-14 0:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-04-13 5:47 ` [PATCH RFC v2 2/4] virtio_net: disable cb aggressively Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 8:53 ` Jason Wang
2021-04-13 14:08 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-04-13 14:33 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 5:47 ` [PATCH RFC v2 3/4] virtio_net: move tx vq operation under tx queue lock Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 8:54 ` Jason Wang
2021-04-13 14:02 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 14:20 ` Willem de Bruijn
2021-04-13 19:38 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-04-13 5:47 ` [PATCH RFC v2 4/4] virtio_net: move txq wakeups under tx q lock Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20210413180830-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=weiwan@google.com \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.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).