Re: NAPI Race?

[P]

Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> It looks to me like net_rx_action() might suffer from a race, which in
> turn might explain some weirdness in my driver test results.
>
> Here's the essence of the function from net/core/dev.c:
>
> net_rx_action()
> {
>         local_irq_disable();
>         while (!list_empty(&queue->poll_list)) {
>                 local_irq_enable();
>                 /* do stuff */
>                 local_irq_disable();
>         }
>         local_irq_enable();
> }
>
> Say I receive a packet. net_rx_action() processes it in the while loop
> and reenables interrupts. But just before net_rx_action() returns, I
> receive another packet, and __netif_rx_schedule() gets called from the
> driver. Then the soft irq is raised from within itself. If I'm not
> interrupted for some other reason, the packet will get processed only at
> the next jiffie when the soft irq is invoked again.
>
> Am I mistaken?

Probably not, as I tested the reception timing
accuracy against an independent hardware "packet
timestamper", and out of 2 million packets,
3 were delayed by up to 5ms on the linux box
(e100 NAPI). There were about 10 packets delayed
between 1ms and 5ms.

Pádraig.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/