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>,
Joe Damato <jdamato@fastly.com>
Subject: [PATCH net v2] net: Handle napi_schedule() calls from non-interrupt
Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2025 23:17:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250223221708.27130-1-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!!!"
For example:
__raise_softirq_irqoff
__napi_schedule
rtl8152_runtime_resume.isra.0
rtl8152_resume
usb_resume_interface.isra.0
usb_resume_both
__rpm_callback
rpm_callback
rpm_resume
__pm_runtime_resume
usb_autoresume_device
usb_remote_wakeup
hub_event
process_one_work
worker_thread
kthread
ret_from_fork
ret_from_fork_asm
And also:
* drivers/net/usb/r8152.c::rtl_work_func_t
* drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c::nsim_start_xmit
There is a long history of issues of this kind:
019edd01d174 ("ath10k: sdio: Add missing BH locking around napi_schdule()")
330068589389 ("idpf: disable local BH when scheduling napi for marker packets")
e3d5d70cb483 ("net: lan78xx: fix "softirq work is pending" error")
e55c27ed9ccf ("mt76: mt7615: add missing bh-disable around rx napi schedule")
c0182aa98570 ("mt76: mt7915: add missing bh-disable around tx napi enable/schedule")
970be1dff26d ("mt76: disable BH around napi_schedule() calls")
019edd01d174 ("ath10k: sdio: Add missing BH locking around napi_schdule()")
30bfec4fec59 ("can: rx-offload: can_rx_offload_threaded_irq_finish(): add new function to be called from threaded interrupt")
e63052a5dd3c ("mlx5e: add add missing BH locking around napi_schdule()")
83a0c6e58901 ("i40e: Invoke softirqs after napi_reschedule")
bd4ce941c8d5 ("mlx4: Invoke softirqs after napi_reschedule")
8cf699ec849f ("mlx4: do not call napi_schedule() without care")
ec13ee80145c ("virtio_net: invoke softirqs after __napi_schedule")
This shows that relying on the caller to arrange a proper context for
the softirqs to be handled while calling napi_schedule() is very fragile
and error prone. Also fixing them can also prove challenging if the
caller may be called from different kinds of contexts.
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>
Reported-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Reported-by: Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/354a2690-9bbf-4ccb-8769-fa94707a9340@molgen.mpg.de/
Cc: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>
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 80e415ccf2c8..5c1b93a3f50a 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -4693,7 +4693,7 @@ 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:[~2025-02-23 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-23 22:17 Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2025-02-26 10:31 ` [PATCH net v2] net: Handle napi_schedule() calls from non-interrupt Eric Dumazet
2025-02-26 13:21 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-02-26 13:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-02-26 13:38 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2025-03-05 8:52 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-02-27 3:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20250223221708.27130-1-frederic@kernel.org \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jdamato@fastly.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).