From: Wen Yang <wen.yang@linux.dev>
To: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
Ryo Takakura <ryotkkr98@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softirq: allow raising NET_RX_SOFTIRQ from SMP call on RT
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2025 00:08:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6063d0da-4053-4f3c-a79a-0985c82e9649@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1db9aefe-c9b3-4e9b-b4e3-45c25497e988@amd.com>
On 12/22/25 14:03, K Prateek Nayak wrote:
> Hello Wen,
>
> On 12/19/2025 11:28 PM, wen.yang@linux.dev wrote:
>> From: Wen Yang <wen.yang@linux.dev>
>>
>> RPS distributes network processing load across CPUs by enqueuing
>> packets on a remote CPU's backlog and raising NET_RX_SOFTIRQ to
>> process them. This is done via an smp_call_function.
>
> I'm assuming net_rps_send_ipi() is the function responsible for IPIs
> and the only two callers - net_rps_action_and_irq_enable() and
> dev_cpu_dead() - first check for "!use_backlog_threads()" before
> sending the IPI which is always false in case of PREEMPT_RT.
>
> What is the path where you end up sending this IPI on PREEMPT_RT?
> Can you please trace the path of this problematic IPI on the latest
> upstream and prevent that instead?
>
Thank you for your suggestion.
Our production environment uses 6.1 and 6.6 kernels, and after porting
commit dad6b9770263 ("net: Allow to use SMP threads for backlog NAPI.")
and its dependent patches, this issue has indeed been fixed.
--
Best wishes,
Wen
>>
>> On PREEMPT_RT kernels, raising a softirq from an SMP call function
>> can increase preemption-off latencies. A WARN_ON_ONCE() in
>> do_softirq_post_smp_call_flush() enforces this.
>>
>> A previous commit 6675ce20046d ("softirq: Allow raising SCHED_SOFTIRQ from SMP-call-function on RT kernel")
>
> There is also a good justification in 6675ce20046d that idle load
> balancing periodically checks need_resched() and will bail out
> immediately if it detects a wakeup but the same cannot be expected of
> all NET_RX_SOFTIRQ handlers so ignoring the warning isn't a solution.
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-24 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-19 17:58 wen.yang
2025-12-22 6:03 ` K Prateek Nayak
2025-12-24 16:08 ` Wen Yang [this message]
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=6063d0da-4053-4f3c-a79a-0985c82e9649@linux.dev \
--to=wen.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=penguin-kernel@I-love.SAKURA.ne.jp \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ryotkkr98@gmail.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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®