> -----Original Message-----
> From: Intel-wired-lan <[email protected]> On Behalf Of
> Jason Xing
> Sent: Saturday, July 26, 2025 12:34 PM
> To: Nguyen, Anthony L <[email protected]>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw
> <[email protected]>; Zaremba, Larysa
> <[email protected]>; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Fijalkowski, Maciej
> <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Jason Xing
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH v2 iwl-net] ixgbe: xsk: resolve the negative
> overflow of budget in ixgbe_xmit_zc
> 
> From: Jason Xing <[email protected]>
> 
> Resolve the budget negative overflow which leads to returning true in
> ixgbe_xmit_zc even when the budget of descs are thoroughly consumed.
> 
> Before this patch, when the budget is decreased to zero and finishes
> sending the last allowed desc in ixgbe_xmit_zc, it will always turn back and
> enter into the while() statement to see if it should keep processing packets,
> but in the meantime it unexpectedly decreases the value again to 'unsigned
> int (0--)', namely, UINT_MAX. Finally, the ixgbe_xmit_zc returns true,
> showing 'we complete cleaning the budget'. That also means
> 'clean_complete = true' in ixgbe_poll.
> 
> The true theory behind this is if that budget number of descs are
> consumed, it implies that we might have more descs to be done. So we
> should return false in ixgbe_xmit_zc to tell napi poll to find another chance
> to start polling to handle the rest of descs. On the contrary, returning true
> here means job done and we know we finish all the possible descs this time
> and we don't intend to start a new napi poll.
> 
> It is apparently against our expectations. Please also see how
> ixgbe_clean_tx_irq() handles the problem: it uses do..while() statement to
> make sure the budget can be decreased to zero at most and the negative
> overflow never happens.
> 
> The patch adds 'likely' because we rarely would not hit the loop codition
> since the standard budget is 256.
> 
> Fixes: 8221c5eba8c1 ("ixgbe: add AF_XDP zero-copy Tx support")
> Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Larysa Zaremba <[email protected]>
> ---
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250720091123.474-3-
> [email protected]/
> 1. use 'negative overflow' instead of 'underflow' (Willem) 2. add reviewed-by
> tag (Larysa) 3. target iwl-net branch (Larysa) 4. add the reason why the patch
> adds likely() (Larysa)
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_xsk.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_xsk.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_xsk.c
> index ac58964b2f08..7b941505a9d0 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_xsk.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_xsk.c
> @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static bool ixgbe_xmit_zc(struct ixgbe_ring
> *xdp_ring, unsigned int budget)
>       dma_addr_t dma;
>       u32 cmd_type;
> 
> -     while (budget-- > 0) {
> +     while (likely(budget)) {
>               if (unlikely(!ixgbe_desc_unused(xdp_ring))) {
>                       work_done = false;
>                       break;
> @@ -433,6 +433,8 @@ static bool ixgbe_xmit_zc(struct ixgbe_ring
> *xdp_ring, unsigned int budget)
>               xdp_ring->next_to_use++;
>               if (xdp_ring->next_to_use == xdp_ring->count)
>                       xdp_ring->next_to_use = 0;
> +
> +             budget--;
>       }
> 
>       if (tx_desc) {
> --
> 2.41.3

Tested-by: Priya Singh <[email protected]>

Reply via email to