On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 07:55:32PM +0000, Brian Vazquez wrote:
> Add a helper function to correctly handle the lockless
> synchronization when the sender needs to block. The paradigm is
>
> if (no_resources()) {
> stop_queue();
> barrier();
> if (!no_resources())
> restart_queue();
> }
>
> netif_subqueue_maybe_stop already handles the paradigm correctly, but
> the code split the check for resources in three parts, the first one
> (descriptors) followed the protocol, but the other two (completions and
> tx_buf) were only doing the first part and so race prone.
>
> Luckily netif_subqueue_maybe_stop macro already allows you to use a
> function to evaluate the start/stop conditions so the fix only requires
> the right helper function to evaluate all the conditions at once.
>
> The patch removes idpf_tx_maybe_stop_common since it's no longer needed
> and instead adjusts separately the conditions for singleq and splitq.
>
> Note that idpf_rx_buf_hw_update doesn't need to check for resources
> since that will be covered in idpf_tx_splitq_frame.
Should the above read idpf_tx_buf_hw_update() rather than
idpf_rx_buf_hw_update()?
If so, I see that this is true when idpf_tx_buf_hw_update() is called from
idpf_tx_singleq_frame(). But is a check required in the case where
idpf_rx_buf_hw_update() is called by idpf_tx_singleq_map()?
>
> To reproduce:
>
> Reduce the threshold for pending completions to increase the chances of
> hitting this pause by changing your kernel:
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.h
>
> -#define IDPF_TX_COMPLQ_OVERFLOW_THRESH(txcq) ((txcq)->desc_count >> 1)
> +#define IDPF_TX_COMPLQ_OVERFLOW_THRESH(txcq) ((txcq)->desc_count >> 4)
>
> Use pktgen to force the host to push small pkts very aggressively:
>
> ./pktgen_sample02_multiqueue.sh -i eth1 -s 100 -6 -d $IP -m $MAC \
> -p 10000-10000 -t 16 -n 0 -v -x -c 64
>
> Fixes: 6818c4d5b3c2 ("idpf: add splitq start_xmit")
> Signed-off-by: Josh Hay <joshua.a....@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Vazquez <bria...@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Luigi Rizzo <lri...@google.com>
...
