On Thu, 11 Jun 2026 10:56:43 +0800, [email protected] wrote:
> From: Menglong Dong <[email protected]>
>
> During packet receiving in virtio-net, the rq can be empty, which means
> "rq->vq->num_free == virtqueue_get_vring_size(rq->vq)", in
> virtnet_add_recvbuf_xsk(), if we are using xsk. Meanwhile, the fill ring
> can be empty too, which means we can't allocate anything from
> xsk_buff_alloc_batch(). Then, we will set the XDP_RING_NEED_WAKEUP flag.
>
> However, if the user clean all the data in rx ring and fill the
> "fill ring" and check the XDP_RING_NEED_WAKEUP flag after
> xsk_buff_alloc_batch() and before xsk_set_rx_need_wakeup(), then the rx
> napi will never be scheduled: the rx ring is empty, which means we will
> never receive a packet to trigger the further recv fill. The rx ring is
> empty now, so the user will not check the flag too.
>
> Fix this by set the XDP_RING_NEED_WAKEUP flag before
> xsk_buff_alloc_batch() if both rq->vq and fill ring are empty.
>
> Meanwhile, set the XDP_RING_NEED_WAKEUP flag if we have any free entry in
> rq->vq.
>
> Fixes: e3f8800aa243 ("virtio-net: xsk: Support wakeup on RX side")
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> index f4adcfee7a80..4b5b3fa62008 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> @@ -1323,16 +1323,27 @@ static int virtnet_add_recvbuf_xsk(struct
> virtnet_info *vi, struct receive_queue
> struct xsk_buff_pool *pool, gfp_t gfp)
> {
> struct xdp_buff **xsk_buffs;
> + bool need_wakeup;
> dma_addr_t addr;
> int err = 0;
> u32 len, i;
> int num;
>
> + need_wakeup = xsk_uses_need_wakeup(pool);
> xsk_buffs = rq->xsk_buffs;
>
> + /* If both rq->vq and fill ring are empty, and then the user submit
> + * all the chunks to the fill ring and check the wake up flag
> + * after xsk_buff_alloc_batch() and before xsk_set_rx_need_wakeup(),
> + * we will lose the chance to wake up the rx napi, so we have to
> + * set the need_wakeup flag here.
> + */
> + if (need_wakeup && virtqueue_get_vring_size(rq->vq) == rq->vq->num_free)
> + xsk_set_rx_need_wakeup(pool);
Is Condition A here too strict? We should trigger the wakeup under a wider range
of scenarios.
> +
> num = xsk_buff_alloc_batch(pool, xsk_buffs, rq->vq->num_free);
> if (!num) {
> - if (xsk_uses_need_wakeup(pool)) {
> + if (need_wakeup) {
> xsk_set_rx_need_wakeup(pool);
> /* Return 0 instead of -ENOMEM so that NAPI is
> * descheduled.
> @@ -1341,8 +1352,6 @@ static int virtnet_add_recvbuf_xsk(struct virtnet_info
> *vi, struct receive_queue
> }
>
> return -ENOMEM;
> - } else {
> - xsk_clear_rx_need_wakeup(pool);
> }
>
> len = xsk_pool_get_rx_frame_size(pool) + vi->hdr_len;
> @@ -1363,6 +1372,16 @@ static int virtnet_add_recvbuf_xsk(struct virtnet_info
> *vi, struct receive_queue
> goto err;
> }
>
> + if (need_wakeup) {
> + if (rq->vq->num_free)
> + /* We have free buffers, so we'd better wake up the
> + * rx napi as soon as possible.
> + */
> + xsk_set_rx_need_wakeup(pool);
Is the purpose of waking up RX NAPI to invoke try_fill_recv? However,
virtnet_poll does not call try_fill_recv directly. it is done
conditionally.
Thanks.
> + else
> + xsk_clear_rx_need_wakeup(pool);
> + }
> +
> return num;
>
> err:
> --
> 2.54.0
>
