netdev - Re: [PATCH 6/6] vhost_net: don't poll on -EFAULT

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: <20120417101820.GB20905@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 Apr 2012 13:18:20 +0300
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, xma@...ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] vhost_net: don't poll on -EFAULT

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 02:30:27PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 04/17/2012 02:07 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 01:54:55PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>On 04/17/2012 12:57 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 11:27:01AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>>On 04/16/2012 09:39 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>>>>On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 04:28:10PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>>>>>  On 04/16/2012 03:16 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>>>>>>>  >On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 02:08:33PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>  >>Currently, we restart tx polling unconditionally when sendmsg()
> >>>>>>>>>  >>fails. This would cause unnecessary wakeups of vhost wokers as it's
> >>>>>>>>>  >>only needed when the socket send buffer were exceeded.
> >>>>>>>>  >Why is this a problem?
> >>>>>>>  >    This issue is when guest driver is able to hit the
> >>>>>>-EFAULT, vhost
> >>>>>>>  discard the the descriptor and restart the polling. This would wake
> >>>>>>>  vhost thread and repeat the loop again which waste cpu.
> >>>>>Does same thing happen if we get an error from copy from user?
> >>>>>
> >>>>Right, so do you think it makes sense that we only restart polling
> >>>>on -EAGAIN or -ENOBUFS?
> >>>Sounds OK. BTW how do you test this?
> >>>
> >>Not very hard, w/o this patch, we can see almost 100% cpu
> >>utilization for vhost thread if guest hit EFAULT or EINVAL. With
> >>this patch, the cpu utilization should be very low I think.
> >Yes but do you have a test that makes guest hit EFAULT or EINVAL?
> 
> Looks like we can do this by supplying an invalid hdr_len in vnet
> header as tap does the check for this.

Ah so you patched qemu to do this? Cool. Can you post the patch for testing pls?

> >--
> >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
--
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