From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, petrm@nvidia.com,
pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, mlxsw@nvidia.com,
saeedm@nvidia.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next RFC 0/2] net: devlink: remove devlink big lock
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 10:49:45 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220627104945.5d8337a5@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YrnPqzKexfgNVC10@shredder>
On Mon, 27 Jun 2022 18:41:31 +0300 Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 03:54:59PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > This is an attempt to remove use of devlink_mutex. This is a global lock
> > taken for every user command. That causes that long operations performed
> > on one devlink instance (like flash update) are blocking other
> > operations on different instances.
>
> This patchset is supposed to prevent one devlink instance from blocking
> another? Devlink does not enable "parallel_ops", which means that the
> generic netlink mutex is serializing all user space operations. AFAICT,
> this series does not enable "parallel_ops", so I'm not sure what
> difference the removal of the devlink mutex makes.
>
> The devlink mutex (in accordance with the comment above it) serializes
> all user space operations and accesses to the devlink devices list. This
> resulted in a AA deadlock in the previous submission because we had a
> flow where a user space operation (which acquires this mutex) also tries
> to register / unregister a nested devlink instance which also tries to
> acquire the mutex.
>
> As long as devlink does not implement "parallel_ops", it seems that the
> devlink mutex can be reduced to only serializing accesses to the devlink
> devices list, thereby eliminating the deadlock.
I'm unclear on why we can't wait for mlx5 locking rework which will
allow us to move completely to per-instance locks. Do you have extra
insights into how that work is progressing? I was hoping that it will
be complete in the next two months.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-27 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-27 13:54 [patch net-next RFC 0/2] net: devlink: remove devlink big lock Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 13:55 ` [patch net-next RFC 1/2] net: devlink: make sure that devlink_try_get() works with valid pointer during xarray iteration Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 13:55 ` [patch net-next RFC 2/2] net: devlink: replace devlink_mutex by per-devlink lock Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 15:41 ` [patch net-next RFC 0/2] net: devlink: remove devlink big lock Ido Schimmel
2022-06-27 15:55 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-28 7:43 ` Ido Schimmel
2022-06-29 10:25 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-29 10:36 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-29 11:30 ` Ido Schimmel
2022-06-29 11:47 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-27 17:49 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-06-28 6:32 ` Jiri Pirko
2022-06-28 7:04 ` Jiri Pirko
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=20220627104945.5d8337a5@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=idosch@nvidia.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=mlxsw@nvidia.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=petrm@nvidia.com \
--cc=saeedm@nvidia.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).