From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
peterz@infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] revert: "softirq: Let ksoftirqd do its job"
Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 18:42:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230508184219.4049952c@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57e66b364f1b6f09c9bc0316742c3b14f4ce83bd.1683526542.git.pabeni@redhat.com>
On Mon, 8 May 2023 08:17:44 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote:
> Due to the mentioned commit, when the ksoftirqd processes take charge
> of softirq processing, the system can experience high latencies.
>
> In the past a few workarounds have been implemented for specific
> side-effects of the above:
>
> commit 1ff688209e2e ("watchdog: core: make sure the watchdog_worker is not deferred")
> commit 8d5755b3f77b ("watchdog: softdog: fire watchdog even if softirqs do not get to run")
> commit 217f69743681 ("net: busy-poll: allow preemption in sk_busy_loop()")
> commit 3c53776e29f8 ("Mark HI and TASKLET softirq synchronous")
>
> but the latency problem still exists in real-life workloads, see the
> link below.
>
> The reverted commit intended to solve a live-lock scenario that can now
> be addressed with the NAPI threaded mode, introduced with commit
> 29863d41bb6e ("net: implement threaded-able napi poll loop support"),
> and nowadays in a pretty stable status.
>
> While a complete solution to put softirq processing under nice resource
> control would be preferable, that has proven to be a very hard task. In
> the short term, remove the main pain point, and also simplify a bit the
> current softirq implementation.
>
> Note that this change also reverts commit 3c53776e29f8 ("Mark HI and
> TASKLET softirq synchronous") and commit 1342d8080f61 ("softirq: Don't
> skip softirq execution when softirq thread is parking"), which are
> direct follow-ups of the feature commit. A single change is preferred to
> avoid known bad intermediate states introduced by a patch series
> reverting them individually.
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/305d7742212cbe98621b16be782b0562f1012cb6.camel@redhat.com/
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
> Tested-by: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-09 1:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-08 6:17 [PATCH] revert: "softirq: Let ksoftirqd do its job" Paolo Abeni
2023-05-08 21:21 ` Thomas Gleixner
2023-05-09 1:42 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2023-05-09 9:02 ` Eric Dumazet
2023-05-09 15:19 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20230508184219.4049952c@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kerneljasonxing@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@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).