netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH] reuseport: compute the ehash only if needed

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 12 Dec 2017 19:25:44 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Craig Gallek <kraigatgoog@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] reuseport: compute the ehash only if needed

Hi,
On Tue, 2017-12-12 at 12:44 -0500, Craig Gallek wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 8:09 AM, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> > When a reuseport socket group is using a BPF filter to distribute
> > the packets among the sockets, we don't need to compute any hash
> > value, but the current reuseport_select_sock() requires the
> > caller to compute such hash in advance.
> > 
> > This patch reworks reuseport_select_sock() to compute the hash value
> > only if needed - missing or failing BPF filter. Since different
> > hash functions have different argument types - ipv4 addresses vs ipv6
> > ones - to avoid over-complicate the interface, reuseport_select_sock()
> > is now a macro.
> 
> Purely subjective, but I think a slightly more complicated function
> signature for reuseport_select_sock (and reuseport_select_sock6?)
> would look a little better than this macro.  It would avoid needing to
> expose the reuseport_info struct and would keep the rcu semantics
> entirely within the function call (the fast-path memory access
> semantics here are already non-trivial...)

Thanks for the feedback. 

I was in doubt about the macro, too. The downside of using explicit
functions is the very long argument list and the need of 2 separate
functions for ipv4 and ipv6.

> > Additionally, the sk_reuseport test is move inside reuseport_select_sock,
> > to avoid some code duplication.
> > 
> > Overall this gives small but measurable performance improvement
> > under UDP flood while using SO_REUSEPORT + BPF.
> 
> Exciting, do you have some specific numbers here?  I'd be interested
> in knowing what kinds of loads you end up seeing improvements for.

this are the numbers I collected so far:

(ipv4)
socks nr 	vanilla(kpps)	patched(kpps)
1		1747		1843
2		3109		3140
3		4480		4534
4		5796		5864
5		7063		7139
6		8168		8235

(ipv6)
socks nr 	vanilla(kpps)	patched(kpps)
1		1433		1544
2		2537		2731
3		3622		3794
4		4689		4979
5		5738		6011
6		6671		6920

Cheers,

Paolo