From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>,
Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
Subject: [PATCH] net: Handle napi_schedule() calls from non-interrupt
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 18:30:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250221173009.21742-1-frederic@kernel.org> (raw)
napi_schedule() is expected to be called either:
* From an interrupt, where raised softirqs are handled on IRQ exit
* From a softirq disabled section, where raised softirqs are handled on
the next call to local_bh_enable().
* From a softirq handler, where raised softirqs are handled on the next
round in do_softirq(), or further deferred to a dedicated kthread.
Other bare tasks context may end up ignoring the raised NET_RX vector
until the next random softirq handling opportunity, which may not
happen before a while if the CPU goes idle afterwards with the tick
stopped.
Such "misuses" have been detected on several places thanks to messages
of the kind:
"NOHZ tick-stop error: local softirq work is pending, handler #08!!!"
Chasing each and every misuse can be a long journey given the amount of
existing callers. Fixing them can also prove challenging if the caller
may be called from different kind of context.
Therefore fix this from napi_schedule() itself with waking up ksoftirqd
when softirqs are raised from task contexts.
Reported-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>
Closes: 354a2690-9bbf-4ccb-8769-fa94707a9340@molgen.mpg.de
Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
---
net/core/dev.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index c0021cbd28fc..2419cc558a64 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -4692,7 +4692,7 @@ static inline void ____napi_schedule(struct softnet_data *sd,
* we have to raise NET_RX_SOFTIRQ.
*/
if (!sd->in_net_rx_action)
- __raise_softirq_irqoff(NET_RX_SOFTIRQ);
+ raise_softirq_irqoff(NET_RX_SOFTIRQ);
}
#ifdef CONFIG_RPS
--
2.48.1
next reply other threads:[~2025-02-21 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-21 17:30 Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2025-02-21 17:59 ` [PATCH] net: Handle napi_schedule() calls from non-interrupt Joe Damato
2025-02-21 22:12 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-03-03 9:46 ` MOESSBAUER, Felix
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=20250221173009.21742-1-frederic@kernel.org \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
--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