linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] netdev: support binding dma-buf to netdevice

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

Message-ID: <CAHS8izOGSE-PJ1uShkH_Mr6kUoC1EjM_9P1J=_TO6nLFP9K53Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 9 Nov 2023 18:59:04 -0800
From:   Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
        Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Jeroen de Borst <jeroendb@...gle.com>,
        Praveen Kaligineedi <pkaligineedi@...gle.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Kaiyuan Zhang <kaiyuanz@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 04/12] netdev: support binding dma-buf to netdevice

On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 12:30 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to wrap my head around the whole infra... the above line is
> confusing. Why do you increment dma_addr? it will be re-initialized in
> the next iteration.
>

That is just a mistake, sorry. Will remove this increment.

On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 1:29 AM Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com> wrote:> >>>
> >>> gen_pool_destroy BUG_ON() if it's not empty at the time of destroying.
> >>> Technically that should never happen, because
> >>> __netdev_devmem_binding_free() should only be called when the refcount
> >>> hits 0, so all the chunks have been freed back to the gen_pool. But,
> >>> just in case, I don't want to crash the server just because I'm
> >>> leaking a chunk... this is a bit of defensive programming that is
> >>> typically frowned upon, but the behavior of gen_pool is so severe I
> >>> think the WARN() + check is warranted here.
> >>
> >> It seems it is pretty normal for the above to happen nowadays because of
> >> retransmits timeouts, NAPI defer schemes mentioned below:
> >>
> >> https://lkml.kernel.org/netdev/168269854650.2191653.8465259808498269815.stgit@firesoul/
> >>
> >> And currently page pool core handles that by using a workqueue.
> >
> > Forgive me but I'm not understanding the concern here.
> >
> > __netdev_devmem_binding_free() is called when binding->ref hits 0.
> >
> > binding->ref is incremented when an iov slice of the dma-buf is
> > allocated, and decremented when an iov is freed. So,
> > __netdev_devmem_binding_free() can't really be called unless all the
> > iovs have been freed, and gen_pool_size() == gen_pool_avail(),
> > regardless of what's happening on the page_pool side of things, right?
>
> I seems to misunderstand it. In that case, it seems to be about
> defensive programming like other checking.
>
> By looking at it more closely, it seems napi_frag_unref() call
> page_pool_page_put_many() directly， which means devmem seems to
> be bypassing the napi_safe optimization.
>
> Can napi_frag_unref() reuse napi_pp_put_page() in order to reuse
> the napi_safe optimization?
>

I think it already does. page_pool_page_put_many() is only called if
!recycle or !napi_pp_put_page(). In that case
page_pool_page_put_many() is just a replacement for put_page(),
because this 'page' may be an iov.

-- 
Thanks,
Mina