diff mbox series

[v4,3/3] net: Restrict receive packets queuing to housekeeping CPUs

Message ID 20200625223443.2684-4-nitesh@redhat.com (mailing list archive)
State Not Applicable, archived
Headers show
Series Preventing job distribution to isolated CPUs | expand

Commit Message

Nitesh Narayan Lal June 25, 2020, 10:34 p.m. UTC
From: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>

With the existing implementation of store_rps_map(), packets are queued
in the receive path on the backlog queues of other CPUs irrespective of
whether they are isolated or not. This could add a latency overhead to
any RT workload that is running on the same CPU.

Ensure that store_rps_map() only uses available housekeeping CPUs for
storing the rps_map.

Signed-off-by: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>
Signed-off-by: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>
---
 net/core/net-sysfs.c | 10 +++++++++-
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Peter Zijlstra June 26, 2020, 11:14 a.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 06:34:43PM -0400, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote:
> From: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>
> 
> With the existing implementation of store_rps_map(), packets are queued
> in the receive path on the backlog queues of other CPUs irrespective of
> whether they are isolated or not. This could add a latency overhead to
> any RT workload that is running on the same CPU.
> 
> Ensure that store_rps_map() only uses available housekeeping CPUs for
> storing the rps_map.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>

Dave, ACK if I route this?
David Miller June 26, 2020, 5:20 p.m. UTC | #2
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2020 13:14:01 +0200

> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 06:34:43PM -0400, Nitesh Narayan Lal wrote:
>> From: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>
>> 
>> With the existing implementation of store_rps_map(), packets are queued
>> in the receive path on the backlog queues of other CPUs irrespective of
>> whether they are isolated or not. This could add a latency overhead to
>> any RT workload that is running on the same CPU.
>> 
>> Ensure that store_rps_map() only uses available housekeeping CPUs for
>> storing the rps_map.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Alex Belits <abelits@marvell.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@redhat.com>
> 
> Dave, ACK if I route this?

No problem:

Acked-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/core/net-sysfs.c b/net/core/net-sysfs.c
index e353b822bb15..677868fea316 100644
--- a/net/core/net-sysfs.c
+++ b/net/core/net-sysfs.c
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ 
 #include <linux/if_arp.h>
 #include <linux/slab.h>
 #include <linux/sched/signal.h>
+#include <linux/sched/isolation.h>
 #include <linux/nsproxy.h>
 #include <net/sock.h>
 #include <net/net_namespace.h>
@@ -741,7 +742,7 @@  static ssize_t store_rps_map(struct netdev_rx_queue *queue,
 {
 	struct rps_map *old_map, *map;
 	cpumask_var_t mask;
-	int err, cpu, i;
+	int err, cpu, i, hk_flags;
 	static DEFINE_MUTEX(rps_map_mutex);
 
 	if (!capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN))
@@ -756,6 +757,13 @@  static ssize_t store_rps_map(struct netdev_rx_queue *queue,
 		return err;
 	}
 
+	hk_flags = HK_FLAG_DOMAIN | HK_FLAG_WQ;
+	cpumask_and(mask, mask, housekeeping_cpumask(hk_flags));
+	if (cpumask_empty(mask)) {
+		free_cpumask_var(mask);
+		return -EINVAL;
+	}
+
 	map = kzalloc(max_t(unsigned int,
 			    RPS_MAP_SIZE(cpumask_weight(mask)), L1_CACHE_BYTES),
 		      GFP_KERNEL);