Netdev Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
To: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@ti.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] ethtool: runtime-resume netdev parent before ethtool ioctl ops
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 21:24:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <21baed17-f8bb-2a41-6485-a149f99df9ea@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ad83fe47-e9ef-73cb-06fa-765cd69f5a6d@ti.com>

On 05.08.2021 10:20, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/08/2021 22:33, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> On 04.08.2021 10:43, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 04/08/2021 00:32, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>> On 03.08.2021 22:41, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 01/08/2021 13:36, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>>>>> If a network device is runtime-suspended then:
>>>>>> - network device may be flagged as detached and all ethtool ops (even if not
>>>>>>      accessing the device) will fail because netif_device_present() returns
>>>>>>      false
>>>>>> - ethtool ops may fail because device is not accessible (e.g. because being
>>>>>>      in D3 in case of a PCI device)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It may not be desirable that userspace can't use even simple ethtool ops
>>>>>> that not access the device if interface or link is down. To be more friendly
>>>>>> to userspace let's ensure that device is runtime-resumed when executing the
>>>>>> respective ethtool op in kernel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>     net/ethtool/ioctl.c | 18 +++++++++++++++---
>>>>>>     1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/net/ethtool/ioctl.c b/net/ethtool/ioctl.c
>>>>>> index baa5d1004..b7ff9abe7 100644
>>>>>> --- a/net/ethtool/ioctl.c
>>>>>> +++ b/net/ethtool/ioctl.c
>>>>>> @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
>>>>>>     #include <linux/rtnetlink.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/sched/signal.h>
>>>>>>     #include <linux/net.h>
>>>>>> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>>>>>>     #include <net/devlink.h>
>>>>>>     #include <net/xdp_sock_drv.h>
>>>>>>     #include <net/flow_offload.h>
>>>>>> @@ -2589,7 +2590,7 @@ int dev_ethtool(struct net *net, struct ifreq *ifr)
>>>>>>         int rc;
>>>>>>         netdev_features_t old_features;
>>>>>>     -    if (!dev || !netif_device_present(dev))
>>>>>> +    if (!dev)
>>>>>>             return -ENODEV;
>>>>>>           if (copy_from_user(&ethcmd, useraddr, sizeof(ethcmd)))
>>>>>> @@ -2645,10 +2646,18 @@ int dev_ethtool(struct net *net, struct ifreq *ifr)
>>>>>>                 return -EPERM;
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>     +    if (dev->dev.parent)
>>>>>> +        pm_runtime_get_sync(dev->dev.parent);
>>>>>
>>>>> the PM Runtime should allow to wake up parent when child is resumed if everything is configured properly.
>>>>>
>>>> Not sure if there's any case yet where the netdev-embedded device is power-managed.
>>>> Typically only the parent (e.g. a PCI device) is.
>>>>
>>>>> rpm_resume()
>>>>> ...
>>>>>       if (!parent && dev->parent) {
>>>>>    --> here
>>>>>
>>>> Currently we don't get that far because we will bail out here already:
>>>>
>>>> else if (dev->power.disable_depth > 0)
>>>>          retval = -EACCES;
>>>>
>>>> If netdev-embedded device isn't power-managed then disable_depth is 1.
>>>
>>> Right. But if pm_runtime_enable() is added for ndev->dev then PM runtime will start working for it
>>> and should handle parent properly - from my experience, every time any code need manipulate with "parent" or
>>> smth. else to make PM runtime working it means smth. is wrong.
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/core/net-sysfs.c b/net/core/net-sysfs.c
>>> index f6197774048b..33b72b788aa2 100644
>>> --- a/net/core/net-sysfs.c
>>> +++ b/net/core/net-sysfs.c
>>> @@ -1963,6 +1963,7 @@ int netdev_register_kobject(struct net_device *ndev)
>>>          }
>>>            pm_runtime_set_memalloc_noio(dev, true);
>>> +       pm_runtime_enable(dev);
>>>            return error;
>>>   }
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> So, hence PM runtime calls are moved to from drivers to net_core wouldn't be more correct approach to
>>>>> enable PM runtime for netdev->dev and lets PM runtime do the job?
>>>>>
>>>> Where would netdev->dev be runtime-resumed so that netif_device_present() passes?
>>>
>>> That's the biggest issues here. Some driver uses netif_device_detach() in PM runtime and, this way, introduces custom dependency
>>> between Core device PM (runtime) sate and Net core, other driver does not do.
>>> Does it means every driver with PM runtime now have to be updated to indicate it PM state to Net core with netif_device_detach()?
>>
>> No, that's not needed.
>>
>>> Why? Why return value from pm_runtime_get calls is not enough?
>>>
>>> Believe me it's terrible idea to introduce custom PM state dependency between PM runtime and Net core,
>>> for example it took years to sync properly System wide suspend and PM runtime which are separate framworks.
>>>
>>> By the way netif_device_detach() during System Wide suspend is looks perfectly valid, because entering
>>> System wide Suspend should prohibit any access to netdev at some stage. And that's what 99% of network drivers are doing
>>> (actually I can find only ./realtek/r8169_main.c which abuse netif_device_detach() function and,
>>> I assume, it is your case)
>>>
>> Actually I was inspired by the Intel drivers, see e.g. __igc_shutdown(). They also detach the
>> netdevice on runtime suspend. One reason is that several core functions check for device
>> presence before e.g. calling a ndo callback. Example: dev_set_mtu_ext()
> 
> right and also:
> - netlink - which you've hacked already
> - 8021q: vlan_dev_ioctl/vlan_dev_neigh_setup/vlan_add_rx_filter_info/vlan_kill_rx_filter_info
> 
> 
>> Same applies for __dev_set_rx_mode(). Therefore I wondered whether cpsw_ndo_set_rx_mode()
>> - that does not include runtime-resuming the device - may be called when device is
>> runtime-suspended, e.g. if interface is up, but link is down.
> 
> CPSW doesn't manage PM runtime in link status handler, as it has only on/off state and off state can cause full
> context loss restore of which is expensive and hard to implement. And for most of netdev drivers no aggressive PM runtime
> is implemented exactly because of that (mac/vlan/fdb/mdb/...). Common patterns:
> 
> (a)
> .probe
>  -get
> .remove
>  -put
> 
> (b)
> .probe
>  -get
>  -put
> .open
>  -get
> .close
>  -put
> .protect places which may be called when netif is down
> 
> The CPSW follows (b) and so cpsw_ndo_set_rx_mode() can't be called when when device is
> runtime-suspended.
> 
> I assume, some hw like PCI, can have more PM states and in some of them keep HW context intact.
> 
Exactly, there's no reason to keep PCI in D0 if link is down. Once NIC detects a cable was
plugged in it triggers a PCI PME and PCI core sets PCI bus from D3cold/D3hot to D0 and
runtime-resumes device.

> 
>>
>>>> Wouldn't we then need RPM ops for the parent (e.g. PCI) and for netdev->dev?
>>>
>>> No. as I know -  netdev->dev can be declared as pm_runtime_no_callbacks(&adap->dev);
>>> I2C adapter might be a good example to check.
>>>
>>>> E.g. the parent runtime-resume can be triggered by a PCI PME, then it would
>>>> have to resume netdev->dev.
>>>>
>>>>> But, to be honest, I'm not sure adding PM runtime manipulation to the net core is a good idea -
>>>>
>>>> The TI CPSW driver runtime-resumes the device in begin ethtool op and suspends
>>>> it in complete. This pattern is used in more than one driver and may be worth
>>>> being moved to the core.
>>>
>>> I'm not against code refactoring and optimization, but in my opinion it has to be done right from the beginning or
>>> not done at all.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> at minimum it might be tricky and required very careful approach (especially in err path).
>>>>> For example, even in this patch you do not check return value of pm_runtime_get_sync() and in
>>>>> commit bd869245a3dc ("net: core: try to runtime-resume detached device in __dev_open") also actualy.
>>>>
>>>> The pm_runtime_get_sync() calls are attempts here. We don't want to bail out if a device
>>>> doesn't support RPM.
>>>
>>> And if 'parent' is not supporting PM runtime - it, as i see, should be handled by PM runtime core properly.
>>>
>>> I agree that checking the return code could make sense, but then we would
>>>> have to be careful which error codes we consider as failed.
>>>
>>> huh. you can't 'try' pm_runtime_get_sync() and then align on netif_device_present() :(
>>>
>>> might be, some how, it will work for r8169_main, but will not work for others.
>>> - no checking pm_runtime_get_sync() err code will cause PM runtime 'usage_count' leak
>>
>> No. pm_runtime_get_sync() always bumps the usage count, no matter whether it fails or not.
> 
> 
>> This makes it easy to deal with this. The problem you describe exists with
>> pm_runtime_resume_and_get(). That's why I wondered whether we should annotate this
>> function as __must_check. See here:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/CAJZ5v0gps0C2923VqM8876npvhcETsyN+ajAkBKX5kf49J0+Mg@mail.gmail.com/T/#t
>>
>>> - no checking pm_runtime_get_sync() err may cause to continue( for TI CPSW for example) with
>>>    device in undefined PM state ("disabled" or "half-enabled") and so crash later.
>>>
>> I'd say 95% of rpm callers don't check the return value. I'm not saying this is a good thing,
>> but obviously it doesn't cause relevant harm.
> 
> this is completely wrong assumption as PM errors cause silent stuck, undefined behavior or dumps (sometimes delayed)
> which is terribly hard to root cause.
> 
> yes. many drivers do not check, but over last few years more and more strict policies applied to avoid that and
> in many case no checking return code - is red flag and patch reject.
> Don't like that phrase ;), but "It doesn't mean that incorrect code has to be copy-pasted all over the places"
> 
> this is correct get pattern for get:
>     ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
>     if (ret < 0) {
>         pm_runtime_put_noidle(&pdev->dev);
>         return ret;
>     }
> 
That's exactly what pm_runtime_resume_and_get() does. IIRC this helper hasn't been
part of the API from the beginning and was added later.

> My strong opinion
>  - PM runtime return code must be checked.
>  - get rid of netif_device_detach() in r8169
> 
> by the way, have you tried below test with your driver (not sure how it works for you):
> 
> .rtl_open
>  - pm_runtime_get_sync
>  - pm_runtime_put_sync - usage_count == 0
> .r8169_phylink_handler
>  - pm_request_resume - why async? still usage_count == 0

pm_request_resume() is only meant to cancel a potentially scheduled runtime-suspend
if link has a short drop. In such a case link would be up again after ~ 3-4s,
timeout for runtime-suspending device after link drop is 10s.

> .some ethtool request to go through dev_ethtool()
>  - pm_runtime_get_sync
>  - pm_runtime_put - async, usage_count == 0
>    ^ would not it put r8169 in runtime-suspended state while link is still UP?
>  
No, see rtl8169_runtime_idle(). If link is up no runtime suspend is scheduled.

> 
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The TI CPSW driver may also be placed in non reachable state when netdev is closed (and even lose context),
>>>>> but we do not use netif_device_detach() (so netdev is accessible through netdev_ops/ethtool_ops),
>>>>> but instead wake up device by runtime PM for allowed operations or just save requested configuration which
>>>>> is applied at netdev->open() time then.
>>>>> I feel that using netif_device_detach() in PM runtime sounds like a too heavy approach ;)
>>>>>
>>>> That's not a rare pattern when suspending or runtime-suspending to prevent different types
>>>> of access to a not accessible device. But yes, it's relatively big hammer ..
>>>
>>> Again, netif_device_detach() seems correct for System wide suspend, but in my opinion - it's
>>> not correct for PM runtime.
>>>
>>> Sry, with all do respect, first corresponding driver has to be fixed and not Net core hacked to support it.
>>>
>>> Further decisions is up to maintainers.
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> huh, see it's merged already, so...
>>>>>
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> +    if (!netif_device_present(dev)) {
>>>>>> +        rc = -ENODEV;
>>>>>> +        goto out;
>>>>>> +    }
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>         if (dev->ethtool_ops->begin) {
>>>>>>             rc = dev->ethtool_ops->begin(dev);
>>>>>> -        if (rc  < 0)
>>>>>> -            return rc;
>>>>>> +        if (rc < 0)
>>>>>> +            goto out;
>>>>>>         }
>>>>>>         old_features = dev->features;
>>>>>>     @@ -2867,6 +2876,9 @@ int dev_ethtool(struct net *net, struct ifreq *ifr)
>>>>>>           if (old_features != dev->features)
>>>>>>             netdev_features_change(dev);
>>>>>> +out:
>>>>>> +    if (dev->dev.parent)
>>>>>> +        pm_runtime_put(dev->dev.parent);
>>>>>>           return rc;
>>>>>>     }
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 


  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-08-05 19:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-01 10:35 [PATCH net-next 0/4] ethtool: runtime-resume netdev parent before ethtool ops Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-01 10:36 ` [PATCH net-next 1/4] ethtool: runtime-resume netdev parent before ethtool ioctl ops Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-03 20:41   ` Grygorii Strashko
2021-08-03 21:32     ` Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-04  8:43       ` Grygorii Strashko
2021-08-04 19:33         ` Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-05  8:20           ` Grygorii Strashko
2021-08-05 11:11             ` Joakim Zhang
2021-08-05 11:58               ` Grygorii Strashko
2021-08-05 19:24             ` Heiner Kallweit [this message]
2021-08-05 20:00               ` Grygorii Strashko
2021-08-01 10:37 ` [PATCH net-next 2/4] ethtool: move implementation of ethnl_ops_begin/complete to netlink.c Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-01 10:40 ` [PATCH net-next 3/4] ethtool: move netif_device_present check from ethnl_parse_header_dev_get to ethnl_ops_begin Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-01 10:41 ` [PATCH net-next 4/4] ethtool: runtime-resume netdev parent in ethnl_ops_begin Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-05 11:51   ` Julian Wiedmann
2021-08-05 18:48     ` Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-01 16:25 ` [PATCH net-next 0/4] ethtool: runtime-resume netdev parent before ethtool ops Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-02 14:15   ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-02 16:42     ` Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-02 16:54       ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-02 19:00         ` Heiner Kallweit
2021-08-03 12:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=21baed17-f8bb-2a41-6485-a149f99df9ea@gmail.com \
    --to=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=grygorii.strashko@ti.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] ethtool: runtime-resume netdev parent before ethtool ioctl ops' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).