On 23.09.25 18:36, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 12:15:49AM +0200, Simon Schippers wrote:
>> The new wrappers tun_ring_consume/tap_ring_consume deal with consuming an
>> entry of the ptr_ring and then waking the netdev queue when entries got
>> invalidated to be used again by the producer.
>> To avoid waking the netdev queue when the ptr_ring is full, it is checked
>> if the netdev queue is stopped before invalidating entries. Like that the
>> netdev queue can be safely woken after invalidating entries.
>>
>> The READ_ONCE in __ptr_ring_peek, paired with the smp_wmb() in
>> __ptr_ring_produce within tun_net_xmit guarantees that the information
>> about the netdev queue being stopped is visible after __ptr_ring_peek is
>> called.
>>
>> The netdev queue is also woken after resizing the ptr_ring.
>>
>> Co-developed-by: Tim Gebauer <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Tim Gebauer <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Simon Schippers <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/tap.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  drivers/net/tun.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>>  2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/tap.c b/drivers/net/tap.c
>> index 1197f245e873..f8292721a9d6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/tap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/tap.c
>> @@ -753,6 +753,46 @@ static ssize_t tap_put_user(struct tap_queue *q,
>>      return ret ? ret : total;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static struct sk_buff *tap_ring_consume(struct tap_queue *q)
>> +{
>> +    struct netdev_queue *txq;
>> +    struct net_device *dev;
>> +    bool will_invalidate;
>> +    bool stopped;
>> +    void *ptr;
>> +
>> +    spin_lock(&q->ring.consumer_lock);
>> +    ptr = __ptr_ring_peek(&q->ring);
>> +    if (!ptr) {
>> +            spin_unlock(&q->ring.consumer_lock);
>> +            return ptr;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    /* Check if the queue stopped before zeroing out, so no ptr get
>> +     * produced in the meantime, because this could result in waking
>> +     * even though the ptr_ring is full.
> 
> So what? Maybe it would be a bit suboptimal? But with your design, I do
> not get what prevents this:
> 
> 
>       stopped? -> No
>               ring is stopped
>       discard
> 
> and queue stays stopped forever
> 
> 

I totally missed this (but I am not sure why it did not happen in my 
testing with different ptr_ring sizes..).

I guess you are right, there must be some type of locking.
It probably makes sense to lock the netdev txq->_xmit_lock whenever the 
consumer invalidates old ptr_ring entries (so when r->consumer_head >= 
r->consumer_tail). The producer holds this lock with dev->lltx=false. Then 
the consumer is able to wake the queue safely.

So I would now just change the implementation to:
tun_net_xmit:
...
if ptr_ring_produce
    // Could happen because of unproduce in vhost_net..
    netif_tx_stop_queue
    ...
    goto drop

if ptr_ring_full
    netif_tx_stop_queue
...

tun_ring_recv/tap_do_read (the implementation for the batched methods 
would be done in the similar way):
...
ptr_ring_consume
if r->consumer_head >= r->consumer_tail
    __netif_tx_lock_bh
    netif_tx_wake_queue
    __netif_tx_unlock_bh

This implementation does not need any new ptr_ring helpers and no fancy 
ordering tricks.
Would this implementation be sufficient in your opinion?

>> The order of the operations
>> +     * is ensured by barrier().
>> +     */
>> +    will_invalidate = __ptr_ring_will_invalidate(&q->ring);
>> +    if (unlikely(will_invalidate)) {
>> +            rcu_read_lock();
>> +            dev = rcu_dereference(q->tap)->dev;
>> +            txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(dev, q->queue_index);
>> +            stopped = netif_tx_queue_stopped(txq);
>> +    }
>> +    barrier();
>> +    __ptr_ring_discard_one(&q->ring, will_invalidate);
>> +
>> +    if (unlikely(will_invalidate)) {
>> +            if (stopped)
>> +                    netif_tx_wake_queue(txq);
>> +            rcu_read_unlock();
>> +    }
> 
> 
> After an entry is consumed, you can detect this by checking
> 
>                       r->consumer_head >= r->consumer_tail
> 
> 
> so it seems you could keep calling regular ptr_ring_consume
> and check afterwards?
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> +    spin_unlock(&q->ring.consumer_lock);
>> +
>> +    return ptr;
>> +}
>> +
>>  static ssize_t tap_do_read(struct tap_queue *q,
>>                         struct iov_iter *to,
>>                         int noblock, struct sk_buff *skb)
>> @@ -774,7 +814,7 @@ static ssize_t tap_do_read(struct tap_queue *q,
>>                                      TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>>  
>>              /* Read frames from the queue */
>> -            skb = ptr_ring_consume(&q->ring);
>> +            skb = tap_ring_consume(q);
>>              if (skb)
>>                      break;
>>              if (noblock) {
>> @@ -1207,6 +1247,8 @@ int tap_queue_resize(struct tap_dev *tap)
>>      ret = ptr_ring_resize_multiple_bh(rings, n,
>>                                        dev->tx_queue_len, GFP_KERNEL,
>>                                        __skb_array_destroy_skb);
>> +    if (netif_running(dev))
>> +            netif_tx_wake_all_queues(dev);
>>  
>>      kfree(rings);
>>      return ret;
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
>> index c6b22af9bae8..682df8157b55 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
>> @@ -2114,13 +2114,53 @@ static ssize_t tun_put_user(struct tun_struct *tun,
>>      return total;
>>  }
>>  
>> +static void *tun_ring_consume(struct tun_file *tfile)
>> +{
>> +    struct netdev_queue *txq;
>> +    struct net_device *dev;
>> +    bool will_invalidate;
>> +    bool stopped;
>> +    void *ptr;
>> +
>> +    spin_lock(&tfile->tx_ring.consumer_lock);
>> +    ptr = __ptr_ring_peek(&tfile->tx_ring);
>> +    if (!ptr) {
>> +            spin_unlock(&tfile->tx_ring.consumer_lock);
>> +            return ptr;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    /* Check if the queue stopped before zeroing out, so no ptr get
>> +     * produced in the meantime, because this could result in waking
>> +     * even though the ptr_ring is full. The order of the operations
>> +     * is ensured by barrier().
>> +     */
>> +    will_invalidate = __ptr_ring_will_invalidate(&tfile->tx_ring);
>> +    if (unlikely(will_invalidate)) {
>> +            rcu_read_lock();
>> +            dev = rcu_dereference(tfile->tun)->dev;
>> +            txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(dev, tfile->queue_index);
>> +            stopped = netif_tx_queue_stopped(txq);
>> +    }
>> +    barrier();
>> +    __ptr_ring_discard_one(&tfile->tx_ring, will_invalidate);
>> +
>> +    if (unlikely(will_invalidate)) {
>> +            if (stopped)
>> +                    netif_tx_wake_queue(txq);
>> +            rcu_read_unlock();
>> +    }
>> +    spin_unlock(&tfile->tx_ring.consumer_lock);
>> +
>> +    return ptr;
>> +}
>> +
>>  static void *tun_ring_recv(struct tun_file *tfile, int noblock, int *err)
>>  {
>>      DECLARE_WAITQUEUE(wait, current);
>>      void *ptr = NULL;
>>      int error = 0;
>>  
>> -    ptr = ptr_ring_consume(&tfile->tx_ring);
>> +    ptr = tun_ring_consume(tfile);
>>      if (ptr)
>>              goto out;
>>      if (noblock) {
>> @@ -2132,7 +2172,7 @@ static void *tun_ring_recv(struct tun_file *tfile, int 
>> noblock, int *err)
>>  
>>      while (1) {
>>              set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
>> -            ptr = ptr_ring_consume(&tfile->tx_ring);
>> +            ptr = tun_ring_consume(tfile);
>>              if (ptr)
>>                      break;
>>              if (signal_pending(current)) {
>> @@ -3621,6 +3661,9 @@ static int tun_queue_resize(struct tun_struct *tun)
>>                                        dev->tx_queue_len, GFP_KERNEL,
>>                                        tun_ptr_free);
>>  
>> +    if (netif_running(dev))
>> +            netif_tx_wake_all_queues(dev);
>> +
>>      kfree(rings);
>>      return ret;
>>  }
>> -- 
>> 2.43.0
> 

Reply via email to