Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yury Norov <ynorov@nvidia.com>
To: Florian Bezdeka <florian.bezdeka@siemens.com>
Cc: Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
	Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>,
	Rasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Clark Williams <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
	Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] genirq: Allow drivers to respect userspace IRQ affinities
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2026 14:28:30 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aoX1zplzjXJl6lOV@yury> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260819-flo-net-7-2-make-stmmac-default-affinity-aware-v1-0-3f79a99cadaf@siemens.com>

On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 04:30:29PM +0200, Florian Bezdeka wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm trying to demonstrate a real problem for PREEMPT_RT here, using the
> stmmac driver as example. There are more drivers "affected" but let's
> ignore that for one moment. Let's discuss the underlying problem first.
> 
> To achieve the best throughput most network devices are based on
> multiple queues. Each queue (pair) is equipped with one device IRQ. To
> reach the maximum throughput, spreading / balancing them between all the
> available CPUs makes sense.
> 
> While some IRQ chips - and with that some architectures - implement the
> necessary spreading (or balancing) at IRQ chip level others don't do that.
> If a device driver wants to make sure that balancing happens as intended
> it has to implement that on his own (again).
> 
> The typical shortcoming of those implementations: They do not honor RT
> relevant settings like the smp_default_affinity or isolated CPU cores.
> Device IRQs are balanced over "all" or "all online CPUs".
> 
> That's not a problem for "normal" systems, but for RT systems - or
> systems running cpu-isolating workloads - it is.
> 
> IRQ affinities can be controlled via /proc/irq/<n>/smp_affinity{_list}
> for existing IRQs and via /proc/irq/default_smp_affinity for "new" or 
> "not yet registered" IRQs. Those settings - as written by user space - 
> must be honored. Always.
> 
> In our case the settings were bypassed by the following sequence:
> 
>     - system boot (all CPUs available, no isolation yet)
>     - deployment of the first RT application
>         - writing a new default smp affinity (remove RT isolated cores)
>         - migrating away all that were targeting the now isolated cores
>         - creating a cgroup with RT cores as the only usable cores
>     - RT application running fine for some time
>     - stmmac network interface went up for the first time
>         - driver balances IRQs over all CPUs, ignoring the existing
> 	  affinities
>     - Too much IRQ traffic on RT cores
> 
> Even with series applied there is (at least) one problem remaining:
> 
> The /proc/irq/<n> interface is populated on the first request_irq() call. 
> That means that we can not control affinities from userspace until the 
> IRQ gets requested.
> 
> The problem for network interfaces: We have to bring up the interfaces
> once, to be able to control such affinities.
> 
> That raises the question why request_irq() is called on "link up" time,
> while the low level vector allocation takes place during device probing.
> At least that seems to be the common pattern. Can someone tell me why
> this is done this way? Shouldn't we call request_irq() at the same time?
> 
> So, let's hope that all of this was short enough that somebody reads it

I did!

> and precise enough to make the problem clear. The idea behind this series
> is not fixing or applying the series as is. I'm expecting a discussion
> first. So, input welcome!

Not sure I understand the full scope, but it's not because of your
description. And I want to learn more about the RT business. I'll
comment the cpumasks part, and please keep me in CC.

Thanks,
Yury

> Signed-off-by: Florian Bezdeka <florian.bezdeka@siemens.com>
> ---
> Florian Bezdeka (3):
>       cpumask: Honor irq_default_affinity in cpumask_local_spread()
>       genirq: Honor existing IRQ affinities when setting affinity hints
>       net: stmmac: Migrate IRQ balancing to cpumask_local_spread()
> 
>  drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++----
>  kernel/irq/manage.c                               | 10 ++++++++++
>  lib/cpumask.c                                     | 10 ++++++----
>  3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: aa2e13ae8d3cbe2c15ef4f7e971b2de0832794aa
> change-id: 20260810-flo-net-7-2-make-stmmac-default-affinity-aware-a145a4941d8f
> 
> Best regards,
> -- 
> Florian Bezdeka <florian.bezdeka@siemens.com>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-19 18:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-19 14:30 [PATCH RFC 0/3] genirq: Allow drivers to respect userspace IRQ affinities Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-19 14:30 ` [PATCH RFC 1/3] cpumask: Honor irq_default_affinity in cpumask_local_spread() Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-19 18:38   ` Yury Norov
2026-08-19 14:30 ` [PATCH RFC 2/3] genirq: Honor existing IRQ affinities when setting affinity hints Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-19 14:30 ` [PATCH RFC 3/3] net: stmmac: Migrate IRQ balancing to cpumask_local_spread() Florian Bezdeka
2026-08-19 18:45   ` Yury Norov
2026-08-19 18:28 ` Yury Norov [this message]
2026-08-19 23:54 ` [PATCH RFC 0/3] genirq: Allow drivers to respect userspace IRQ affinities Andrew Lunn
2026-08-20  0:10   ` Andrew Lunn

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=aoX1zplzjXJl6lOV@yury \
    --to=ynorov@nvidia.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com \
    --cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=florian.bezdeka@siemens.com \
    --cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
    --cc=linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk \
    --cc=maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com \
    --cc=mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=tglx@kernel.org \
    --cc=yury.norov@gmail.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