From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de
Cc: jstultz@google.com, edumazet@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] softirq: don't yield if only expedited handlers are pending
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 14:12:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221222221244.1290833-4-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221222221244.1290833-1-kuba@kernel.org>
In networking we try to keep Tx packet queues small, so we limit
how many bytes a socket may packetize and queue up. Tx completions
(from NAPI) notify the sockets when packets have left the system
(NIC Tx completion) and the socket schedules a tasklet to queue
the next batch of frames.
This leads to a situation where we go thru the softirq loop twice.
First round we have pending = NET (from the NIC IRQ/NAPI), and
the second iteration has pending = TASKLET (the socket tasklet).
On two web workloads I looked at this condition accounts for 10%
and 23% of all ksoftirqd wake ups respectively. We run NAPI
which wakes some process up, we hit need_resched() and wake up
ksoftirqd just to run the TSQ (TCP small queues) tasklet.
Tweak the need_resched() condition to be ignored if all pending
softIRQs are "non-deferred". The tasklet would run relatively
soon, anyway, but once ksoftirqd is woken we're risking stalls.
I did not see any negative impact on the latency in an RR test
on a loaded machine with this change applied.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
---
kernel/softirq.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/softirq.c b/kernel/softirq.c
index ad200d386ec1..4ac59ffb0d55 100644
--- a/kernel/softirq.c
+++ b/kernel/softirq.c
@@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ asmlinkage __visible void __softirq_entry __do_softirq(void)
if (time_is_before_eq_jiffies(end) || !--max_restart)
limit = SOFTIRQ_OVERLOAD_TIME;
- else if (need_resched())
+ else if (need_resched() && pending & ~SOFTIRQ_NOW_MASK)
limit = SOFTIRQ_DEFER_TIME;
else
goto restart;
--
2.38.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-22 22:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-22 22:12 [PATCH 0/3] softirq: uncontroversial change Jakub Kicinski
2022-12-22 22:12 ` [PATCH 1/3] softirq: rename ksoftirqd_running() -> ksoftirqd_should_handle() Jakub Kicinski
2022-12-22 22:12 ` [PATCH 2/3] softirq: avoid spurious stalls due to need_resched() Jakub Kicinski
2023-01-31 22:32 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-03-03 13:30 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-03-03 15:18 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-03-03 21:31 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-03-03 22:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-03 23:25 ` Dave Taht
2023-03-04 1:14 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-03 23:36 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-03 23:44 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-03-04 1:25 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-04 1:39 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-03-04 3:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-04 20:48 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-05 20:43 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-03-05 22:42 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-05 23:00 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2023-03-06 4:30 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-06 11:22 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2023-03-06 9:13 ` David Laight
2023-03-06 11:57 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2023-03-06 14:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2023-03-07 0:51 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-12-22 22:12 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2023-01-09 9:44 ` [PATCH 3/3] softirq: don't yield if only expedited handlers are pending Peter Zijlstra
2023-01-09 10:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-01-09 19:12 ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-03-03 11:41 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-03-03 14:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-04-20 17:24 ` [PATCH 0/3] softirq: uncontroversial change Paolo Abeni
2023-04-20 17:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-04-20 20:23 ` Paolo Abeni
2023-04-21 2:48 ` Jason Xing
2023-04-21 9:33 ` Paolo Abeni
2023-04-21 9:46 ` Jason Xing
2023-05-09 19:56 ` [tip: irq/core] Revert "softirq: Let ksoftirqd do its job" tip-bot2 for Paolo Abeni
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=20221222221244.1290833-4-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jstultz@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).