On 01/08/2014 10:40 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 11:21:21AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 01/07/2014 09:17 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 11:42:24AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> On 01/06/2014 08:42 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 11:21:07AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>>> Currently, the tx queue were selected implicitly in
>>>>>> ndo_dfwd_start_xmit(). The
>>>>>> will cause several issues:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - NETIF_F_LLTX was forced for macvlan device in this case which lead
>>>>>> extra lock
>>>>>> contention.
>>>>>> - dev_hard_start_xmit() was called with NULL txq which bypasses the net
>>>>>> device
>>>>>> watchdog
>>>>>> - dev_hard_start_xmit() does not check txq everywhere which will lead a
>>>>>> crash
>>>>>> when tso is disabled for lower device.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fix this by explicitly introducing a select queue method just for l2
>>>>>> forwarding
>>>>>> offload (ndo_dfwd_select_queue), and introducing dfwd_direct_xmit() to
>>>>>> do the
>>>>>> queue selecting and transmitting for l2 forwarding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With this fixes, NETIF_F_LLTX could be preserved for macvlan and there's
>>>>>> no need
>>>>>> to check txq against NULL in dev_hard_start_xmit().
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the future, it was also required for macvtap l2 forwarding support
>>>>>> since it
>>>>>> provides a necessary synchronization method.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc: John Fastabend <john.r.fastab...@intel.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Neil Horman <nhor...@tuxdriver.com>
>>>>>> Cc: e1000-de...@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com>
>>>>> Instead of creating another operation here to do special queue selection,
>>>>> why
>>>>> not just have ndo_dfwd_start_xmit include a pointer to a pointer in its
>>>>> argument
>>>>> list, so it can pass the txq it used back to the caller
>>>>> (dev_hard_start_xmit)?
>>>>> ndo_dfwd_start_xmit already knows which queue set to pick from (since
>>>>> their
>>>>> reserved for the device doing the transmitting). It seems more clear to
>>>>> me than
>>>>> creating a new netdevice operation.
>>>> See commit 8ffab51b3dfc54876f145f15b351c41f3f703195 ("macvlan: lockless
>>>> tx path"). The point is keep the tx path lockless to be efficient and
>>>> simplicity for management. And macvtap multiqueue was also implemented
>>>> with this assumption. The real contention should be done in the txq of
>>>> lower device instead of macvlan itself. This is also needed for
>>>> multiqueue macvtap.
>>> Ok, I see how you're preserving LLTX here, and thats great, but it doesn't
>>> really buy us anything that I can see. If a macvlan is using hardware
>>> acceleration, it needs to arbitrate access to that hardware. Weather thats
>>> done
>>> by locking the lowerdev's tx queue lock or by enforcing locking on the
>>> macvlan
>>> itself is equivalent. The decision to use dfwd hardware acceleration is
>>> made on
>>> open, so its not like theres any traffic that can avoid the lock, as it all
>>> goes
>>> through the hardware. All I see that this has bought us is an extra
>>> net_device
>>> method (which isn't a big deal, but not necessecary as I see it).
>> As I replied to patch 1/2, looking at the code itself again. The locking
>> on the lowerdev's tx queue is really need since we need synchronize with
>> other control path. Two examples are dev watchdog and ixgbe_down() both
>> of which will try to hold tx lock to synchronize the with transmission.
>> Without holding the lowerdev tx lock, we may have more serious issues.
>> Also, it's a little strange for a net device has two modes. Future
>> developers need to care about two different tx lock paths which is sub
>> optimal.
>>
> Ok, having looked at this for a few hours, I agree, locking in the lowerdev
> has
> some definiate advantages in plugging the holes you've pointed out.
>
>> For the issue of an extra net_device method, if you don't like we can
>> reuse the ndo_select_queue by also passing the accel_priv to that method.
> I do, that actually simplifies things, since it lets us use the entire
> dev_hard_start_xmit path unmodified, which gives us the locking your looking
> for
> without having to create a new slimmed down variant of dev_hard_start_xmit.
>
> Regards
> Neil
Right, will post V2.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
