netdev - Re: Fighting out-of-order reception with RPS?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:36:43 +0200
From:	Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
CC:	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-can@...r.kernel.org" <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
	Sunil Kovvuri <sunil.kovvuri@...il.com>,
	Jonathon Reinhart <jonathon.reinhart@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Fighting out-of-order reception with RPS?

On 07/10/2015 04:48 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 10:55 PM, Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net> wrote:
>> Both drivers do not use NAPI. The just follow the way
>>
>> interrupt -> alloc_skb() -> fill skb -> netif_rx(skb)
>>
>> I'm usually testing with the USB adapters as the PCIe setup is not very
>> handy.
>>
> Okay, I see what is happening. In netif_rx when RPS is not enabled
> that packet is queued to the backlog queue for the local CPU. Since
> you're doing round robin on the interrupts then OOO packets can be a
> result. Unfortunately, this is the expected behavior. The correct
> kernel fix would be to move to these drivers to use NAPI.

Hm. Doesn't sound like a good solution when there's a difference between NAPI
and non-NAPI drivers in matters of OOO, right?

> RPS
> eliminates the OOO, but if there is no ability to derive a flow hash
> from packets everything will wind up one queue without load balancing.

Correct.

That's why I added

	skb_set_hash(skb, dev->ifindex, PKT_HASH_TYPE_L2);

in my driver, because the only relevant flow identifiction is the number of
the incoming CAN interface.

> Besides that, automatically setting RPS in drivers is a difficult
> proposition since there is no definitively "correct" way to do that in
> an arbitrary configuration.

What about checking in netif_rx() if the non-NAPI driver has set a hash (aka
the driver is OOO sensitive)?
And if so we could automatically set rps_cpus for this interface in a way that
all CPUs are enabled to take skbs following the hash.

Best regards,
Oliver


--
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