Re: [PATCH V3 net-next 1/2] virtio-net: convert rx mode setting to use workqueue

From: Michael S. Tsirkin
Date: Wed Jun 28 2023 - 09:35:42 EST

Next message: Pavel Machek: "Known bad patches from AUTOSEL was Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/26] 4.14.320-rc1 review"
Previous message: Jason Gunthorpe: "Re: [GIT PULL] RCU changes for v6.5"
Next in thread: Jason Wang: "Re: [PATCH V3 net-next 1/2] virtio-net: convert rx mode setting to use workqueue"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 09:07:25AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 9:21 AM Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 7:39 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 09:31:34AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 3:41 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:43:34AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 5:15 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 04:18:41PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > > > > > This patch convert rx mode setting to be done in a workqueue, this is
> > > > > > > > a must for allow to sleep when waiting for the cvq command to
> > > > > > > > response since current code is executed under addr spin lock.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > Changes since V1:
> > > > > > > > - use RTNL to synchronize rx mode worker
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > > > > > > > index 56ca1d270304..5d2f1da4eaa0 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > > > > > > > @@ -265,6 +265,12 @@ struct virtnet_info {
> > > > > > > > /* Work struct for config space updates */
> > > > > > > > struct work_struct config_work;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + /* Work struct for config rx mode */
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With a bit less abbreviation maybe? setting rx mode?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's fine.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + struct work_struct rx_mode_work;
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > + /* Is rx mode work enabled? */
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ugh not a great comment.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any suggestions for this. E.g we had:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > /* Is delayed refill enabled? */
> > > > >
> > > > > /* OK to queue work setting RX mode? */
> > > >
> > > > Ok.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + bool rx_mode_work_enabled;
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > /* Does the affinity hint is set for virtqueues? */
> > > > > > > > bool affinity_hint_set;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @@ -388,6 +394,20 @@ static void disable_delayed_refill(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > > > > > > > spin_unlock_bh(&vi->refill_lock);
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +static void enable_rx_mode_work(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > + rtnl_lock();
> > > > > > > > + vi->rx_mode_work_enabled = true;
> > > > > > > > + rtnl_unlock();
> > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > +static void disable_rx_mode_work(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > + rtnl_lock();
> > > > > > > > + vi->rx_mode_work_enabled = false;
> > > > > > > > + rtnl_unlock();
> > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > static void virtqueue_napi_schedule(struct napi_struct *napi,
> > > > > > > > struct virtqueue *vq)
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > @@ -2341,9 +2361,11 @@ static int virtnet_close(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > > > > return 0;
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -static void virtnet_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > > > > +static void virtnet_rx_mode_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > - struct virtnet_info *vi = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > > > > > > + struct virtnet_info *vi =
> > > > > > > > + container_of(work, struct virtnet_info, rx_mode_work);
> > > > > > > > + struct net_device *dev = vi->dev;
> > > > > > > > struct scatterlist sg[2];
> > > > > > > > struct virtio_net_ctrl_mac *mac_data;
> > > > > > > > struct netdev_hw_addr *ha;
> > > > > > > > @@ -2356,6 +2378,8 @@ static void virtnet_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > > > > if (!virtio_has_feature(vi->vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_CTRL_RX))
> > > > > > > > return;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + rtnl_lock();
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > vi->ctrl->promisc = ((dev->flags & IFF_PROMISC) != 0);
> > > > > > > > vi->ctrl->allmulti = ((dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI) != 0);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @@ -2373,14 +2397,19 @@ static void virtnet_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > > > > dev_warn(&dev->dev, "Failed to %sable allmulti mode.\n",
> > > > > > > > vi->ctrl->allmulti ? "en" : "dis");
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + netif_addr_lock_bh(dev);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > uc_count = netdev_uc_count(dev);
> > > > > > > > mc_count = netdev_mc_count(dev);
> > > > > > > > /* MAC filter - use one buffer for both lists */
> > > > > > > > buf = kzalloc(((uc_count + mc_count) * ETH_ALEN) +
> > > > > > > > (2 * sizeof(mac_data->entries)), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > > > > > > > mac_data = buf;
> > > > > > > > - if (!buf)
> > > > > > > > + if (!buf) {
> > > > > > > > + netif_addr_unlock_bh(dev);
> > > > > > > > + rtnl_unlock();
> > > > > > > > return;
> > > > > > > > + }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > sg_init_table(sg, 2);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @@ -2401,6 +2430,8 @@ static void virtnet_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > > > > netdev_for_each_mc_addr(ha, dev)
> > > > > > > > memcpy(&mac_data->macs[i++][0], ha->addr, ETH_ALEN);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + netif_addr_unlock_bh(dev);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > sg_set_buf(&sg[1], mac_data,
> > > > > > > > sizeof(mac_data->entries) + (mc_count * ETH_ALEN));
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @@ -2408,9 +2439,19 @@ static void virtnet_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > > > > VIRTIO_NET_CTRL_MAC_TABLE_SET, sg))
> > > > > > > > dev_warn(&dev->dev, "Failed to set MAC filter table.\n");
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + rtnl_unlock();
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > kfree(buf);
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > +static void virtnet_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *dev)
> > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > + struct virtnet_info *vi = netdev_priv(dev);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > + if (vi->rx_mode_work_enabled)
> > > > > > > > + schedule_work(&vi->rx_mode_work);
> > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > static int virtnet_vlan_rx_add_vid(struct net_device *dev,
> > > > > > > > __be16 proto, u16 vid)
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > @@ -3181,6 +3222,8 @@ static void virtnet_freeze_down(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > /* Make sure no work handler is accessing the device */
> > > > > > > > flush_work(&vi->config_work);
> > > > > > > > + disable_rx_mode_work(vi);
> > > > > > > > + flush_work(&vi->rx_mode_work);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > netif_tx_lock_bh(vi->dev);
> > > > > > > > netif_device_detach(vi->dev);
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hmm so queued rx mode work will just get skipped
> > > > > > > and on restore we get a wrong rx mode.
> > > > > > > Any way to make this more robust?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It could be done by scheduling a work on restore.
> > > >
> > > > Rethink this, I think we don't need to care about this case since the
> > > > user processes should have been frozened.
> > >
> > > Yes but not the workqueue. Want to switch to system_freezable_wq?
> >
> > Yes, I will do it in v2.
>
> Actually, this doesn't work. Freezable workqueue can only guarantee
> when being freezed the new work will be queued and not scheduled until
> thaw. So the ktrhead that is executing the workqueue is not freezable.
> The busy loop (even with cond_resched()) will force suspend in this
> case.
>
> I wonder if we should switch to using a dedicated kthread for
> virtio-net then we can allow it to be frozen.
>
> Thanks
>

So what's the plan then?

> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > >
> > > > And that the reason we don't
> > > > even need to hold RTNL here.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @@ -3203,6 +3246,7 @@ static int virtnet_restore_up(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > > > > > > > virtio_device_ready(vdev);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > enable_delayed_refill(vi);
> > > > > > > > + enable_rx_mode_work(vi);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > if (netif_running(vi->dev)) {
> > > > > > > > err = virtnet_open(vi->dev);
> > > > > > > > @@ -4002,6 +4046,7 @@ static int virtnet_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > > > > > > > vdev->priv = vi;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > INIT_WORK(&vi->config_work, virtnet_config_changed_work);
> > > > > > > > + INIT_WORK(&vi->rx_mode_work, virtnet_rx_mode_work);
> > > > > > > > spin_lock_init(&vi->refill_lock);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > if (virtio_has_feature(vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_MRG_RXBUF)) {
> > > > > > > > @@ -4110,6 +4155,8 @@ static int virtnet_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > > > > > > > if (vi->has_rss || vi->has_rss_hash_report)
> > > > > > > > virtnet_init_default_rss(vi);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > + enable_rx_mode_work(vi);
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > /* serialize netdev register + virtio_device_ready() with ndo_open() */
> > > > > > > > rtnl_lock();
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @@ -4207,6 +4254,8 @@ static void virtnet_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > /* Make sure no work handler is accessing the device. */
> > > > > > > > flush_work(&vi->config_work);
> > > > > > > > + disable_rx_mode_work(vi);
> > > > > > > > + flush_work(&vi->rx_mode_work);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > unregister_netdev(vi->dev);
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 2.25.1
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >

Next message: Pavel Machek: "Known bad patches from AUTOSEL was Re: [PATCH 4.14 00/26] 4.14.320-rc1 review"
Previous message: Jason Gunthorpe: "Re: [GIT PULL] RCU changes for v6.5"
Next in thread: Jason Wang: "Re: [PATCH V3 net-next 1/2] virtio-net: convert rx mode setting to use workqueue"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]