[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D0F6E0047@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 09:32:46 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: "'Eric W. Biederman'" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: "stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
"eric.dumazet@...il.com" <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
"mpm@...enic.com" <mpm@...enic.com>,
"satyam.sharma@...il.com" <satyam.sharma@...il.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 6/6] net: Free skbs from irqs when possible.
From: Of Eric W.> Biederman
> Add a test skb_irq_freeable to report when it is safe to free a skb
> from irq context.
>
> It is not safe to free an skb from irq context when:
> - The skb has a destructor as some skb destructors call local_bh_disable
> or spin_lock_bh.
> - There is xfrm state as __xfrm_state_destroy calls spin_lock_bh.
> - There is netfilter conntrack state as destroy_conntrack calls
> spin_lock_bh.
> - If there is a refcounted dst entry on the skb, as __dst_free
> calls spin_lock_bh.
> - If there is a frag_list, which could be a list of any skbs.
That is a lot of conditions to check....
> Otherwise it appears safe to free a skb from interrupt context.
>
> - Update the warning in skb_releae_head_state to warn about freeing
> skb's in the wrong context.
>
> - Update __dev_kfree_skb_irq to free all skbs that it can immediately
>
> - Kill zap_completion_queue because there is no point going through
> a queue of packets that are not safe to free and looking for packets
> that are safe to free.
>
> Signed-off-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> ---
> include/linux/skbuff.h | 13 +++++++++++++
> net/core/dev.c | 14 +++++++++-----
> net/core/netpoll.c | 32 --------------------------------
> net/core/skbuff.c | 13 ++++++++++---
> 4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> index 03db95ab8a8c..53f72b53fd47 100644
> --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
> +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> @@ -2833,6 +2833,19 @@ static inline void skb_init_secmark(struct sk_buff *skb)
> { }
> #endif
>
> +static inline bool skb_irq_freeable(struct sk_buff *skb)
> +{
> + return !skb->destructor &&
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XFRM)
> + !skb->sp &&
> +#endif
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK)
> + !skb->nfct &&
> +#endif
> + (!skb->_skb_refdst || (skb->_skb_refdst & SKB_DST_NOREF)) &&
> + !skb_has_frag_list(skb);
> +}
> +
> static inline void skb_set_queue_mapping(struct sk_buff *skb, u16 queue_mapping)
> {
> skb->queue_mapping = queue_mapping;
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> index 8b3ea4058a5e..99fd079488aa 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -2164,11 +2164,15 @@ void __dev_kfree_skb_irq(struct sk_buff *skb, enum skb_free_reason reason)
> return;
> }
> get_kfree_skb_cb(skb)->reason = reason;
> - local_irq_save(flags);
> - skb->next = __this_cpu_read(softnet_data.completion_queue);
> - __this_cpu_write(softnet_data.completion_queue, skb);
> - raise_softirq_irqoff(NET_TX_SOFTIRQ);
> - local_irq_restore(flags);
> + if (unlikely(skb_irq_freeable(skb))) {
> + __kfree_skb(skb);
> + } else {
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> + skb->next = __this_cpu_read(softnet_data.completion_queue);
> + __this_cpu_write(softnet_data.completion_queue, skb);
> + raise_softirq_irqoff(NET_TX_SOFTIRQ);
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> + }
You've even marked the condition with 'unlikely'.
So I wonder how much you gain from the direct free?
David
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists