linux-kernel - Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] Cleanup IRQ affinity checks in several drivers

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: <ZrzLEZs01KVkvBjw@LQ3V64L9R2>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 16:19:45 +0100
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Harshitha Ramamurthy <hramamurthy@...gle.com>,
	"moderated list:INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS" <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	Jeroen de Borst <jeroendb@...gle.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:MELLANOX MLX4 core VPI driver" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Praveen Kaligineedi <pkaligineedi@...gle.com>,
	Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Shailend Chand <shailend@...gle.com>,
	Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
	Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>,
	Ziwei Xiao <ziweixiao@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/6] Cleanup IRQ affinity checks in several drivers

On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 08:09:15AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 13:12:08 +0100 Joe Damato wrote:
> > Actually... how about a slightly different approach, which caches
> > the affinity mask in the core?
> 
> I was gonna say :)
> 
> >   0. Extend napi struct to have a struct cpumask * field
> > 
> >   1. extend netif_napi_set_irq to:
> >     a. store the IRQ number in the napi struct (as you suggested)
> >     b. call irq_get_effective_affinity_mask to store the mask in the
> >        napi struct
> >     c. set up generic affinity_notify.notify and
> >        affinity_notify.release callbacks to update the in core mask
> >        when it changes
> 
> This part I'm not an export on.
> 
> >   2. add napi_affinity_no_change which now takes a napi_struct
> > 
> >   3. cleanup all 5 drivers:
> >     a. add calls to netif_napi_set_irq for all 5 (I think no RTNL
> >        is needed, so I think this would be straight forward?)
> >     b. remove all affinity_mask caching code in 4 of 5 drivers
> >     c. update all 5 drivers to call napi_affinity_no_change in poll
> > 
> > Then ... anyone who adds support for netif_napi_set_irq to their
> > driver in the future gets automatic support in-core for
> > caching/updating of the mask? And in the future netdev-genl could
> > dump the mask since its in-core?
> > 
> > I'll mess around with that locally to see how it looks, but let me
> > know if that sounds like a better overall approach.

I ended up going with the approach laid out above; moving the IRQ
affinity mask updating code into the core (which adds that ability
to gve/mlx4/mlx5... it seems mlx4/5 cached but didn't have notifiers
setup to update the cached copy?) and adding calls to
netif_napi_set_irq in i40e/iavf and deleting their custom notifier
code.

It's almost ready for rfcv2; I think this approach is probably
better ?

> Could we even handle this directly as part of __napi_poll(),
> once the driver gives core all of the relevant pieces of information ?

I had been thinking the same thing, too, but it seems like at least
one driver (mlx5) counts the number of affinity changes to export as
a stat, so moving all of this to core would break that.

So, I may avoid attempting that for this series.

I'm still messing around with this but will send an rfcv2 in a bit.