netdev - Re: [PATCH] net_sched: sch_sfq: fix allot handling

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]

Date:	Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:27:04 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net_sched: sch_sfq: fix allot handling

Le mercredi 15 décembre 2010 à 17:03 +0100, Patrick McHardy a écrit :
> On 15.12.2010 15:03, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > When deploying SFQ/IFB here at work, I found the allot management was
> > pretty wrong in sfq, even changing allot from short to int...
> > 
> > We should init allot for each new flow turn, not using a previous value,
> > or else small packets can easily make allot overflow.
> > 
> > Before patch, I saw burst of several packets per flow, apparently
> > denying the "allot 1514" limit I had on my SFQ class.
> > 
> > class sfq 11:1 parent 11: 
> >  (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) 
> >  backlog 0b 7p requeues 0 
> >  allot 11546 
> > 
> > class sfq 11:46 parent 11: 
> >  (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) 
> >  backlog 0b 1p requeues 0 
> >  allot -23873 
> > 
> > class sfq 11:78 parent 11: 
> >  (dropped 0, overlimits 0 requeues 0) 
> >  backlog 0b 5p requeues 0 
> >  allot 11393 
> 
> These values definitely look wrong.
> 
> > diff --git a/net/sched/sch_sfq.c b/net/sched/sch_sfq.c
> > index 3cf478d..8c8a190 100644
> > --- a/net/sched/sch_sfq.c
> > +++ b/net/sched/sch_sfq.c
> > @@ -270,7 +270,7 @@ static unsigned int sfq_drop(struct Qdisc *sch)
> >  		/* It is difficult to believe, but ALL THE SLOTS HAVE LENGTH 1. */
> >  		d = q->next[q->tail];
> >  		q->next[q->tail] = q->next[d];
> > -		q->allot[q->next[d]] += q->quantum;
> > +		q->allot[q->next[d]] = q->quantum;
> >  		skb = q->qs[d].prev;
> >  		len = qdisc_pkt_len(skb);
> >  		__skb_unlink(skb, &q->qs[d]);
> 
> I'm not sure about this part, but lets ignore that for now since it
> shouldn't affect your testcase unless you're using CBQ.
> 




> > @@ -321,14 +321,13 @@ sfq_enqueue(struct sk_buff *skb, struct Qdisc *sch)
> >  	sfq_inc(q, x);
> >  	if (q->qs[x].qlen == 1) {		/* The flow is new */
> >  		if (q->tail == SFQ_DEPTH) {	/* It is the first flow */
> > -			q->tail = x;
> >  			q->next[x] = x;
> > -			q->allot[x] = q->quantum;
> >  		} else {
> >  			q->next[x] = q->next[q->tail];
> >  			q->next[q->tail] = x;
> > -			q->tail = x;
> >  		}
> > +		q->tail = x;
> > +		q->allot[x] = q->quantum;
> >  	}
> 
> This looks correct, for new flows allot should be initialized from
> scratch.
> 
> >  	if (++sch->q.qlen <= q->limit) {
> >  		sch->bstats.bytes += qdisc_pkt_len(skb);
> > @@ -382,11 +381,11 @@ sfq_dequeue(struct Qdisc *sch)
> >  			return skb;
> >  		}
> >  		q->next[q->tail] = a;
> > -		q->allot[a] += q->quantum;
> > +		q->allot[a] = q->quantum;
> 
> The allot initialization doesn't seem necessary anymore at all
> now that you're reinitalizing allot for flows that became active
> unconditionally in sfq_enqueue().
> 



> >  	} else if ((q->allot[a] -= qdisc_pkt_len(skb)) <= 0) {
> >  		q->tail = a;
> >  		a = q->next[a];
> > -		q->allot[a] += q->quantum;
> > +		q->allot[a] = q->quantum;
> 
> This seems to break long-term fairness for active flows by not
> accounting for overshooting the allotment in the next round
> anymore.
> 
> I think either the change in sfq_enqueue() or the first change
> in sfq_dequeue() should be enough to fix the problem you're seeing.
> Basically what needs to be done is initialize allot once from
> scratch when the flow becomes active, then add one quantum per
> round while it stays active.

Hmm, you may be right, thanks a lot for reviewing !

I noticed that with normal quantum (1514), my SFQ setup was sending two
full frames per flow after my patch, so was about to prepare a new
version ;)

I'll post a v2 shortly.

Thanks


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html