From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: kusuma.vasana@amd.com
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
radhey.shyam.pandey@amd.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com,
michal.simek@amd.com, Kusuma.Vasana@amd.com, git@amd.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2] net: axienet: Clear stale AXI DMA TX/RX status before re-enabling interrupts
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 16:19:34 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260724231934.1679801-1-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260716124841.2761722-1-kusuma.vasana@amd.com>
This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
---
net: axienet: Clear stale AXI DMA TX/RX status before re-enabling interrupts
This patch clears the AXI DMA IOC/DELAY status bits at the end of the TX
and RX NAPI poll handlers to avoid a redundant stale interrupt caused by
IOC/DELAY bits latched into the status register while interrupts were
masked in the control register during NAPI. The clear is performed
unconditionally, before the napi_complete_done() / CR re-enable step.
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/xilinx/xilinx_axienet_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/xilinx/xilinx_axienet_main.c
> index fcf517069d16..29050c8d04e2 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/xilinx/xilinx_axienet_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/xilinx/xilinx_axienet_main.c
> @@ -1018,6 +1018,13 @@ static int axienet_tx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> netif_wake_queue(ndev);
> }
>
> + /* Clear stale IOC/DELAY bits that may have latched during the
> + * poll window to prevent a stale interrupt when there is no
> + * work pending.
> + */
> + axienet_dma_out32(lp, XAXIDMA_TX_SR_OFFSET,
> + XAXIDMA_IRQ_IOC_MASK | XAXIDMA_IRQ_DELAY_MASK);
> +
> if (packets < budget && napi_complete_done(napi, packets)) {
> /* Re-enable TX completion interrupts. This should
> * cause an immediate interrupt if any TX packets are
[High]
Can this sequence race with a late completion arriving after the poll
loop has exited but before the SR write?
The AXI DMA engine writes cur_p->status and latches SR.IOC asynchronously
from CPU execution. The poll loop's exit condition reads cur_p->status,
and between that read and the unconditional SR IOC/DELAY clear that this
hunk adds, the hardware can set COMPLETE_MASK on the next BD and latch
SR.IOC for it. That legitimate notification would then be wiped by the
new W1C write.
Since napi_schedule() is only called from the ISR, and the ISR only fires
when the IRQ line asserts, napi_complete_done() will succeed here even
though a new completion has appeared. The subsequent CR re-enable would
then observe SR.IOC=0, so the level-sensitive line does not re-assert,
and the completed BD is stranded until the next unrelated completion or
DELAY-timer expiry moves things forward.
Before this patch, any SR bit latched during the poll window (whether
stale or from a late completion) re-asserted the IRQ line after CR
re-enable, which the changelog frames purely as an unnecessary stale
interrupt:
After NAPI completion, re-enabling interrupts immediately
re-asserts the IRQ line due to these stale status register bits,
even when no new work is pending.
Did that same behavior also serve as the recovery path for a completion
that lands in the SR-clear/CR-reenable window? If so, would it be worth
either re-checking cur_p->status after the SR clear and skipping
napi_complete_done() when new work has appeared, or performing the CR
re-enable before the SR clear so a late latch still asserts the line?
NAPIF_STATE_MISSED does not appear to help here because it requires a
napi_schedule() call, which only the ISR performs.
For configurations where axienet_calc_cr() does arm the DELAY timer
(coalesce count > 1), the stranded BD is recovered when DELAY expires:
/* Only set interrupt delay timer if not generating an interrupt on
* every packet
*/
Under DIM with low traffic the coalesce count can settle at 1, in which
case DELAY is not armed and there is no bounded recovery for the last
BD of a burst until another packet arrives. Is that concern valid, or is
there another mechanism that ensures the last BD is drained?
> @@ -1293,6 +1300,13 @@ static int axienet_rx_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> cur_p = &lp->rx_bd_v[lp->rx_bd_ci];
> }
>
> + /* Clear stale IOC/DELAY bits that may have latched during the
> + * poll window to prevent a stale interrupt when there is no
> + * work pending.
> + */
> + axienet_dma_out32(lp, XAXIDMA_RX_SR_OFFSET,
> + XAXIDMA_IRQ_IOC_MASK | XAXIDMA_IRQ_DELAY_MASK);
> +
The same question applies to the RX path: a completion arriving after
the while loop's cur_p->status check but before this SR write would have
its SR.IOC latch cleared, and the subsequent CR re-enable would then not
re-assert the line. Is there a reason the RX path is not exposed to the
same race?
--
pw-bot: cr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-24 23:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-16 12:48 Kusuma Vasana
2026-07-24 23:19 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-07-29 6:28 ` Vasana, Kusuma
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260724231934.1679801-1-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=git@amd.com \
--cc=kusuma.vasana@amd.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michal.simek@amd.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=radhey.shyam.pandey@amd.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®