lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH net] tuntap: raise EPOLLOUT on device up
From
Date


On 2018年05月18日 22:46, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:11:54PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>> On 2018年05月18日 22:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 10:00:31PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> On 2018年05月18日 21:26, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>> On 2018年05月18日 21:13, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 09:00:43PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>>>> We return -EIO on device down but can not raise EPOLLOUT after it was
>>>>>>> up. This may confuse user like vhost which expects tuntap to raise
>>>>>>> EPOLLOUT to re-enable its TX routine after tuntap is down. This could
>>>>>>> be easily reproduced by transmitting packets from VM while down and up
>>>>>>> the tap device. Fixing this by set SOCKWQ_ASYNC_NOSPACE on -EIO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
>>>>>>> Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
>>>>>>> Fixes: 1bd4978a88ac2 ("tun: honor IFF_UP in tun_get_user()")
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>   drivers/net/tun.c | 4 +++-
>>>>>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
>>>>>>> index d45ac37..1b29761 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1734,8 +1734,10 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct
>>>>>>> tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile,
>>>>>>>       int skb_xdp = 1;
>>>>>>>       bool frags = tun_napi_frags_enabled(tun);
>>>>>>>   -    if (!(tun->dev->flags & IFF_UP))
>>>>>>> +    if (!(tun->dev->flags & IFF_UP)) {
>>>>>> Isn't this racy?  What if flag is cleared at this point?
>>>>> I think you mean "set at this point"? Then yes, so we probably need to
>>>>> set the bit during tun_net_close().
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>> Looks no need, vhost will poll socket after it see EIO. So we are ok here?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>> In fact I don't even understand why does this help any longer.
>>>
>> We disable tx polling and only enable it on demand for a better rx
>> performance. You may want to have a look at :
>>
>> commit feb8892cb441c742d4220cf7ced001e7fa070731
>> Author: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
>> Date:   Mon Nov 13 11:45:34 2017 +0800
>>
>>     vhost_net: conditionally enable tx polling
>>
>> Thanks
>
> Question is, what looks at SOCKWQ_ASYNC_NOSPACE.
> I think it's tested when packet is transmitted,
> but there is no guarantee here any packet will
> ever be transmitted.
>

Well, actually, I do plan to disable vq polling from the beginning. But
looks like you do not want this:

See https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10034025/

Thanks

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-19 03:09    [W:0.049 / U:2.248 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site