[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF=yD-LdwcXKK66s5gvJNOH8qCWRt3SvEL-GkkVif=kkOaYGhg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2023 21:07:06 +0200
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, kafai@...com,
songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
kpsingh@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org, willemb@...gle.com,
gustavoars@...nel.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
steffen.klassert@...unet.com, nogikh@...gle.com,
pablo@...filter.org, decui@...rosoft.com, jakub@...udflare.com,
elver@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/7] tun: Introduce virtio-net hashing feature
On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 7:22 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>
> virtio-net have two usage of hashes: one is RSS and another is hash
> reporting. Conventionally the hash calculation was done by the VMM.
> However, computing the hash after the queue was chosen defeats the
> purpose of RSS.
>
> Another approach is to use eBPF steering program. This approach has
> another downside: it cannot report the calculated hash due to the
> restrictive nature of eBPF.
>
> Introduce the code to compute hashes to the kernel in order to overcome
> thse challenges. An alternative solution is to extend the eBPF steering
> program so that it will be able to report to the userspace, but it makes
> little sense to allow to implement different hashing algorithms with
> eBPF since the hash value reported by virtio-net is strictly defined by
> the specification.
>
> The hash value already stored in sk_buff is not used and computed
> independently since it may have been computed in a way not conformant
> with the specification.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
> ---
> +static const struct tun_vnet_hash_cap tun_vnet_hash_cap = {
> + .max_indirection_table_length =
> + TUN_VNET_HASH_MAX_INDIRECTION_TABLE_LENGTH,
> +
> + .types = VIRTIO_NET_SUPPORTED_HASH_TYPES
> +};
No need to have explicit capabilities exchange like this? Tun either
supports all or none.
> case TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF:
> - ret = tun_set_ebpf(tun, &tun->steering_prog, argp);
> + bpf_ret = tun_set_ebpf(tun, &tun->steering_prog, argp);
> + if (IS_ERR(bpf_ret))
> + ret = PTR_ERR(bpf_ret);
> + else if (bpf_ret)
> + tun->vnet_hash.flags &= ~TUN_VNET_HASH_RSS;
Don't make one feature disable another.
TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF and TUNSETVNETHASH are mutually exclusive
functions. If one is enabled the other call should fail, with EBUSY
for instance.
> + case TUNSETVNETHASH:
> + len = sizeof(vnet_hash);
> + if (copy_from_user(&vnet_hash, argp, len)) {
> + ret = -EFAULT;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + if (((vnet_hash.flags & TUN_VNET_HASH_REPORT) &&
> + (tun->vnet_hdr_sz < sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_v1_hash) ||
> + !tun_is_little_endian(tun))) ||
> + vnet_hash.indirection_table_mask >=
> + TUN_VNET_HASH_MAX_INDIRECTION_TABLE_LENGTH) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + argp = (u8 __user *)argp + len;
> + len = (vnet_hash.indirection_table_mask + 1) * 2;
> + if (copy_from_user(vnet_hash_indirection_table, argp, len)) {
> + ret = -EFAULT;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + argp = (u8 __user *)argp + len;
> + len = virtio_net_hash_key_length(vnet_hash.types);
> +
> + if (copy_from_user(vnet_hash_key, argp, len)) {
> + ret = -EFAULT;
> + break;
> + }
Probably easier and less error-prone to define a fixed size control
struct with the max indirection table size.
Btw: please trim the CC: list considerably on future patches.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists