From: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>
To: "tim.gardner@canonical.com" <tim.gardner@canonical.com>
Cc: Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>,
Peter Lieven <pl@dlh.net>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RFS seems to have incompatiblities with bridged vlans
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 18:08:43 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C0EE99B.8030300@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C0ED931.6030402@canonical.com>
Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 06/08/2010 05:00 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> How about only checking against dev->num_rx_queues when that value is
>> greater than one. Since bonding device is calling alloc_netdev, it is
>> not going to set the queue mapping, but dev->num_rx_queues will be one
>> in that case (this handles any intermediate driver that does do
>> multiple queues).
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>> index 6f330ce..30ab66d 100644
>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>> @@ -2270,7 +2270,7 @@ static int get_rps_cpu(struct net_device *dev,
>> struct sk_buff *skb,
>> u16 v16[2];
>> } ports;
>>
>> - if (skb_rx_queue_recorded(skb)) {
>> + if (skb_rx_queue_recorded(skb)&& dev->num_rx_queues> 1) {
>> u16 index = skb_get_rx_queue(skb);
>> if (unlikely(index>= dev->num_rx_queues)) {
>> if (net_ratelimit()) {
>>
Problem with this is it doesn't address mis-aligned num_rx_queues. For example
with the bonding driver defaulting to 16 queues now. We could end up with a base
driver with 16+ queues and a bond with 16. Then we have the same issue again.
eth0 -------> bond / bridge ---------> vlan.id
(nbrxq=64) (nbrxq=16) (nbrxq=X)
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Eric Dumazet<eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Le lundi 07 juin 2010 à 15:30 -0700, John Fastabend a écrit :
>>>
>>>> There is always a possibility that the underlying device sets the
>>>> queue_mapping to be greater then num_cpus. Also I suspect the same
>>>> issue exists with bonding devices. Maybe something like the following
>>>> is worth while? compile tested only,
>>>>
>>>> [PATCH] 8021q: vlan reassigns dev without check queue_mapping
>>>>
>>>> recv path reassigns skb->dev without sanity checking the
>>>> queue_mapping field. This can result in the queue_mapping
>>>> field being set incorrectly if the new dev supports less
>>>> queues then the underlying device.
>>>>
>>>> This patch just resets the queue_mapping to 0 which should
>>>> resolve this issue? Any thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> The same issue could happen on bonding devices as well.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend<john.r.fastabend@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> net/8021q/vlan_core.c | 6 ++++++
>>>> 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/8021q/vlan_core.c b/net/8021q/vlan_core.c
>>>> index bd537fc..ad309f8 100644
>>>> --- a/net/8021q/vlan_core.c
>>>> +++ b/net/8021q/vlan_core.c
>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,9 @@ int __vlan_hwaccel_rx(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
>>>> vlan_group *grp,
>>>> if (!skb->dev)
>>>> goto drop;
>>>>
>>>> + if (unlikely(skb->queue_mapping>= skb->dev->real_num_tx_queues))
>>>> + skb_set_queue_mapping(skb, 0);
>>>> +
>>>> return (polling ? netif_receive_skb(skb) : netif_rx(skb));
>>>>
>>>> drop:
>>>> @@ -93,6 +96,9 @@ vlan_gro_common(struct napi_struct *napi, struct
>>>> vlan_group *grp,
>>>> if (!skb->dev)
>>>> goto drop;
>>>>
>>>> + if (unlikely(skb->queue_mapping>= skb->dev->real_num_tx_queues))
>>>> + skb_set_queue_mapping(skb, 0);
>>>> +
>>>> for (p = napi->gro_list; p; p = p->next) {
>>>> NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->same_flow =
>>>> p->dev == skb->dev&& !compare_ether_header(
>>>> --
>>> Only a workaround, added in hot path in a otherwise 'good' driver
>>> (multiqueue enabled and ready)
Agreed thanks!
>>>
>>> eth0 -------> bond / bridge ---------> vlan.id
>>> (nbtxq=8) (ntxbq=1) (nbtxq=X)
>>>
>>> X is capped to 1 because of bond/bridge, while bond has no "queue"
>>> (LLTX driver)
>>>
>>> Solutions :
>>>
>>> 1) queue_mapping could be silently tested in get_rps_cpu()...
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>>> index 6f330ce..3a3f7f6 100644
>>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>>> @@ -2272,14 +2272,11 @@ static int get_rps_cpu(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>>
>>> if (skb_rx_queue_recorded(skb)) {
>>> u16 index = skb_get_rx_queue(skb);
>>> - if (unlikely(index>= dev->num_rx_queues)) {
>>> - if (net_ratelimit()) {
>>> - pr_warning("%s received packet on queue "
>>> - "%u, but number of RX queues is %u\n",
>>> - dev->name, index, dev->num_rx_queues);
>>> - }
>>> - goto done;
>>> - }
>>> + if (WARN_ONCE(index>= dev->num_rx_queues,
>>> + KERN_WARNING "%s received packet on queue %u, "
>>> + "but number of RX queues is %u\n",
>>> + dev->name, index, dev->num_rx_queues))
>>> + index %= dev->num_rx_queues;
>>> rxqueue = dev->_rx + index;
>>> } else
>>> rxqueue = dev->_rx;
>>>
>>>
Looks good to me.
>>>
>>> 2) bond/bridge should setup more queues, just in case.
>>> We probably need to be able to make things more dynamic,
>>> (propagate nbtxq between layers) but not for 2.6.35
>>>
>>>
The bonding driver is already multiq per Andy Gospodarek's patch commit bb1d912,
but unless the bond and bridge devices use the max num_rx_queues of there
underlying devices this could still go wrong.
The bonding driver would possibly need to increase num_rx_queues and
num_tx_queues when a device is enslaved or be set to some maximum at init for
this to work right.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> index 5e12462..ce813dd 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>> @@ -5012,8 +5012,8 @@ int bond_create(struct net *net, const char *name)
>>>
>>> rtnl_lock();
>>>
>>> - bond_dev = alloc_netdev(sizeof(struct bonding), name ? name : "",
>>> - bond_setup);
>>> + bond_dev = alloc_netdev_mq(sizeof(struct bonding), name ? name : "",
>>> + bond_setup, max(64, nr_cpu_ids));
>>> if (!bond_dev) {
>>> pr_err("%s: eek! can't alloc netdev!\n", name);
>>> rtnl_unlock();
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
> Huh, so you guys are looking at the same issue (only my issue is RPS).
> See http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=127603240621028&w=2. I'm in favor
> of dropping the warning when no queues have been allocated.
>
> How about this (see attached).
Prefer Eric's patch see first comment.
Thanks,
John
>
> rtg
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-06-09 1:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-06-07 20:36 RFS seems to have incompatiblities with bridged vlans Peter Lieven
2010-06-07 21:59 ` Stephen Hemminger
2010-06-07 22:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-07 22:30 ` John Fastabend
2010-06-07 23:13 ` John Fastabend
2010-06-08 14:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-06-08 23:00 ` Tom Herbert
2010-06-08 23:58 ` Tim Gardner
2010-06-09 1:08 ` John Fastabend [this message]
2010-06-09 1:52 ` Tom Herbert
2010-06-09 4:42 ` Eric Dumazet
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=4C0EE99B.8030300@intel.com \
--to=john.r.fastabend@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pl@dlh.net \
--cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
--cc=therbert@google.com \
--cc=tim.gardner@canonical.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).