On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 3:42 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 03:33:08PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 3:18 PM Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2025 at 12:15:45AM +0200, Simon Schippers wrote:
> > > > This patch series deals with TUN, TAP and vhost_net which drop incoming
> > > > SKBs whenever their internal ptr_ring buffer is full. Instead, with this
> > > > patch series, the associated netdev queue is stopped before this 
> > > > happens.
> > > > This allows the connected qdisc to function correctly as reported by [1]
> > > > and improves application-layer performance, see our paper [2]. Meanwhile
> > > > the theoretical performance differs only slightly:
> > >
> > >
> > > About this whole approach.
> > > What if userspace is not consuming packets?
> > > Won't the watchdog warnings appear?
> > > Is it safe to allow userspace to block a tx queue
> > > indefinitely?
> >
> > I think it's safe as it's a userspace device, there's no way to
> > guarantee the userspace can process the packet in time (so no watchdog
> > for TUN).
> >
> > Thanks
>
> Hmm. Anyway, I guess if we ever want to enable timeout for tun,
> we can worry about it then.

The problem is that the skb is freed until userspace calls recvmsg(),
so it would be tricky to implement a watchdog. (Or if we can do, we
can do BQL as well).

> Does not need to block this patchset.

Yes.

Thanks

>
> > >
> > > --
> > > MST
> > >
>


Reply via email to