From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Jemmy Wong <jemmywong512@gmail.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@google.com>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf.kernel@gmail.com>,
Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja@google.com>,
Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>,
Krishna Kumar <krikku@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/rps: consolidate RPS dispatch into netif_rps() helpers
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2026 11:59:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e53482b8-4e1d-4a04-929c-f5cb443ba59d@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260702152830.39065-1-jemmywong512@gmail.com>
On 7/2/26 5:28 PM, Jemmy Wong wrote:
> From: "Jemmy Wong" <jemmywong512@gmail.com>
>
> The RPS steering logic in netif_rx_internal(), netif_receive_skb_internal()
> and netif_receive_skb_list_internal() was open-coded three times, each with
> its own #ifdef CONFIG_RPS block and manual rcu_read_lock()/unlock() pairs.
>
> Factor it into two helpers, netif_rps() for the single-skb path and
> netif_rps_list() for the list path, and switch the callers to
> guard(rcu)/scoped_guard(rcu).
Please be aware of:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1.2/source/Documentation/process/maintainer-netdev.rst#L400
> @@ -5695,33 +5727,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(do_xdp_generic);
>
> static int netif_rx_internal(struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
> - int ret;
> + int ret = NET_RX_UNHANDLED;
> + unsigned int qtail;
>
> net_timestamp_check(READ_ONCE(net_hotdata.tstamp_prequeue), skb);
>
> trace_netif_rx(skb);
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_RPS
> - if (static_branch_unlikely(&rps_needed)) {
> - struct rps_dev_flow voidflow, *rflow = &voidflow;
> - int cpu;
> -
> - rcu_read_lock();
> -
> - cpu = get_rps_cpu(skb->dev, skb, &rflow);
> - if (cpu < 0)
> - cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + scoped_guard(rcu)
> + ret = netif_rps(skb);
> + if (ret != NET_RX_UNHANDLED)
> + return ret;
This function is performance critical and RCU lock is not a no-op. I
*think* this will add an unneeded rcp barrier when RPS is compile
enabled and `static_branch_unlikely(&rps_needed)` evaluate to false.
At very least you should prove that the generated code is no worse than
the current one.
/P
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-10 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-02 15:28 [PATCH] net/rps: consolidate RPS dispatch into netif_rps() helpers Jemmy Wong
2026-07-07 15:48 ` [RESEND PATCH] net/core: " Jemmy Wong
2026-07-10 9:59 ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
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=e53482b8-4e1d-4a04-929c-f5cb443ba59d@redhat.com \
--to=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jemmywong512@gmail.com \
--cc=krikku@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=skhawaja@google.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