Thread (9 messages) 9 messages, 3 authors, 2021-04-09

Re: [PATCH net] net: fix hangup on napi_disable for threaded napi

flat view

From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-04-07 18:13:26
Subsystem: networking [general], the rest · Maintainers: "David S. Miller", Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni, Linus Torvalds

On Wed, 07 Apr 2021 16:54:29 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote:
quoted
quoted
I think in the above example even the normal processing will be
fooled?!? e.g. even without the napi_disable(), napi_thread_wait() will
 will miss the event/will not understand to it really own the napi and
will call schedule().

It looks a different problem to me ?!?

I *think* that replacing inside the napi_thread_wait() loop:

	if (test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED_THREADED, &napi->state) || woken) 

with:

	unsigned long state = READ_ONCE(napi->state);

	if (state & NAPIF_STATE_SCHED &&
	    !(state & (NAPIF_STATE_IN_BUSY_POLL | NAPIF_STATE_DISABLE)) 

should solve it and should also allow removing the
NAPI_STATE_SCHED_THREADED bit. I feel like I'm missing some relevant
point here.  
Heh, that's closer to the proposal Eric put forward.

I strongly dislike   
I guess that can't be addressed ;)
I'm not _that_ unreasonable, I hope :) if there is multiple people
disagreeing with me then so be it.
quoted
the idea that every NAPI consumer needs to be aware
of all the other consumers to make things work. That's n^2 mental
complexity.  
IMHO the overall complexity is not that bad: both napi_disable() and
NAPI poll already set their own specific NAPI bit when acquiring the
NAPI instance, they don't need to be aware of any other NAPI consumer
internal.

The only NAPI user that needs to be aware of others is napi threaded,
and I guess/hope we are not going to add more different kind of NAPI
users.
I thought we agreed that we should leave the door open for other
pollers as a condition of merging this simplistic thread thing.
If you have strong opinion against the above, the only other option I
can think of is patching napi_schedule_prep() to set
both NAPI_STATE_SCHED and NAPI_STATE_SCHED_THREADED if threaded mode is
enabled for the running NAPI. That looks more complex and error prone,
so I really would avoid that.

Any other better option?

Side note: regardless of the above, I think we still need something
similar to the code in this patch, can we address the different issues
separately?
Not sure what issues you're referring to.
quoted
quoted
Here I do not follow?!? Modulo the tiny race (which i was unable to
trigger so far) above napi_disable()/napi_enable() loops work correctly
here.

Could you please re-phrase?  
After napi_disable() the thread will exit right? (napi_thread_wait()
returns -1, the loop in napi_threaded_poll() breaks, and the function
returns).

napi_enable() will not re-start the thread.

What driver are you testing with? You driver must always call
netif_napi_del() and netif_napi_add().  
veth + some XDP dummy prog - used just to enable NAPI.

Yep, it does a full netif_napi_del()/netif_napi_add().

Looks like plain napi_disable()/napi_enable() is not going to work in
threaded mode.
Right, I think the problem is disable_pending check is out of place.

How about this:
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index 9d1a8fac793f..e53f8bfed6a1 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -7041,7 +7041,7 @@ static int napi_thread_wait(struct napi_struct *napi)
 
        set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
 
-       while (!kthread_should_stop() && !napi_disable_pending(napi)) {
+       while (!kthread_should_stop()) {
                /* Testing SCHED_THREADED bit here to make sure the current
                 * kthread owns this napi and could poll on this napi.
                 * Testing SCHED bit is not enough because SCHED bit might be
@@ -7049,8 +7049,14 @@ static int napi_thread_wait(struct napi_struct *napi)
                 */
                if (test_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED_THREADED, &napi->state) || woken) {
                        WARN_ON(!list_empty(&napi->poll_list));
-                       __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
-                       return 0;
+                       if (unlikely(napi_disable_pending(napi))) {
+                               clear_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED, &napi->state);
+                               clear_bit(NAPI_STATE_SCHED_THREADED,
+                                         &napi->state);
+                       } else {
+                               __set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
+                               return 0;
+                       }
                }
 
                schedule();
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help