RE: [PATCH net] hyperv: Fix the error processing in netvsc_send()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 11:46 PM, Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


 -----Original Message-----
 From: Jason Wang [mailto:jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx]
 Sent: Monday, February 2, 2015 1:49 AM
>> btw, I find during netvsc_start_xmit(), ret was change to -ENOSPC
 >> when
>> queue_sends[q_idx] < 1. But non of the caller check -ENOSPC in fact?
 >
> In this case, we don't request re-send, so set ret to a value other
 > than
 > -EAGAIN.
Why not? We have available slots for it to be sent now. Dropping the
 packet in this case may cause out of order sending.

The EAGAIN error doesn't normally happen, because we set the hi water mark
to stop send queue.

This is not true since only txq was stopped which means only network stack stop sending packets but not for control path e.g rndis_filter_send_request() or other callers who call vmbus_sendpacket() directly (e.g recv completion). For control path, user may meet several errors when they want to change mac address under heavy load. What's more serious is netvsc_send_recv_completion(), it can not even recover from more than 3 times of EAGAIN.

I must say mixing data packets with control packets with the same channel sounds really scary. Since control packets could be blocked or even dropped because of data packets already queued during heavy load, and you need to synchronize two paths carefully (e.g I didn't see any tx lock were held if rndis_filter_send_request() call netsc_send() which may stop or start a queue).

 If in really rare case, the ring buffer is full and there
is no outstanding sends, we can't stop queue here because there will be no send-completion msg to wake it up.

Confused, I believe only txq is stopped but we may still get completion interrupt in this case.

And, the ring buffer is likely to be occupied by other special msg, e.g. receive-completion msg (not a normal case), so we can't assume there are available slots.

Then why not checking hv_ringbuf_avail_percent() instead? And there's no need to check queue_sends since it does not count recv completion.

We don't request retry from
the upper layer in this case to avoid possible busy retry.

Can't we just do this by stopping txq and depending on tx interrupt to wake it?

Thanks

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [DMA Engine]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Coverity]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite Backpacking]
  Powered by Linux