Message-ID: <586BD7F3.60109@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 3 Jan 2017 08:57:23 -0800
From:   John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, mst@...hat.com
Cc:     john.r.fastabend@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] virtio_net: XDP support for adjust_head

On 17-01-03 08:54 AM, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 17-01-02 10:01 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2017年01月03日 03:44, John Fastabend wrote:
>>> Add support for XDP adjust head by allocating a 256B header region
>>> that XDP programs can grow into. This is only enabled when a XDP
>>> program is loaded.
>>>
>>> In order to ensure that we do not have to unwind queue headroom push
>>> queue setup below bpf_prog_add. It reads better to do a prog ref
>>> unwind vs another queue setup call.
>>>
>>> : There is a problem with this patch as is. When xdp prog is loaded
>>>    the old buffers without the 256B headers need to be flushed so that
>>>    the bpf prog has the necessary headroom. This patch does this by
>>>    calling the virtqueue_detach_unused_buf() and followed by the
>>>    virtnet_set_queues() call to reinitialize the buffers. However I
>>>    don't believe this is safe per comment in virtio_ring this API
>>>    is not valid on an active queue and the only thing we have done
>>>    here is napi_disable/napi_enable wrappers which doesn't do anything
>>>    to the emulation layer.
>>>
>>>    So the RFC is really to find the best solution to this problem.
>>>    A couple things come to mind, (a) always allocate the necessary
>>>    headroom but this is a bit of a waste (b) add some bit somewhere
>>>    to check if the buffer has headroom but this would mean XDP programs
>>>    would be broke for a cycle through the ring, (c) figure out how
>>>    to deactivate a queue, free the buffers and finally reallocate.
>>>    I think (c) is the best choice for now but I'm not seeing the
>>>    API to do this so virtio/qemu experts anyone know off-hand
>>>    how to make this work? I started looking into the PCI callbacks
>>>    reset() and virtio_device_ready() or possibly hitting the right
>>>    set of bits with vp_set_status() but my first attempt just hung
>>>    the device.
>>
>> Hi John:
>>
>> AFAIK, disabling a specific queue was supported only by virtio 1.0 through
>> queue_enable field in pci common cfg. But unfortunately, qemu does not emulate
>> this at all and legacy device does not even support this. So the safe way is
>> probably reset the device and redo the initialization here.
>>
> 
> OK, I'll draft up a fix with a full reset unless Michael has some idea in
> the meantime.
> 
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/net/virtio_net.c |  106 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>>>   1 file changed, 80 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>>> index 5deeda6..fcc5bd7 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
>>> @@ -159,6 +159,9 @@ struct virtnet_info {
>>>       /* Ethtool settings */
>>>       u8 duplex;
>>>       u32 speed;
>>> +
>>> +    /* Headroom allocated in RX Queue */
>>> +    unsigned int headroom;
>>>   };
>>>     struct padded_vnet_hdr {
>>> @@ -355,6 +358,7 @@ static void virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct virtnet_info *vi,
>>>       }
>>>         if (vi->mergeable_rx_bufs) {
>>> +        xdp->data -= sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf);
>>>           /* Zero header and leave csum up to XDP layers */
>>>           hdr = xdp->data;
>>>           memset(hdr, 0, vi->hdr_len);
>>> @@ -371,7 +375,7 @@ static void virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct virtnet_info *vi,
>>>           num_sg = 2;
>>>           sg_init_table(sq->sg, 2);
>>>           sg_set_buf(sq->sg, hdr, vi->hdr_len);
>>> -        skb_to_sgvec(skb, sq->sg + 1, 0, skb->len);
>>> +        skb_to_sgvec(skb, sq->sg + 1, vi->headroom, xdp->data_end - xdp->data);
>>
>> vi->headroom look suspicious, should it be xdp->data - xdp->data_hard_start?
>>
> 
> Yep found this as well while testing small packet receive.
> 
>>>       }
>>>       err = virtqueue_add_outbuf(sq->vq, sq->sg, num_sg,
>>>                      data, GFP_ATOMIC);
>>> @@ -393,34 +397,39 @@ static u32 do_xdp_prog(struct virtnet_info *vi,
>>>                  struct bpf_prog *xdp_prog,
>>>                  void *data, int len)
>>>   {
>>> -    int hdr_padded_len;
>>>       struct xdp_buff xdp;
>>> -    void *buf;
>>>       unsigned int qp;
>>>       u32 act;
>>>   +
>>>       if (vi->mergeable_rx_bufs) {
>>> -        hdr_padded_len = sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf);
>>> -        xdp.data = data + hdr_padded_len;
>>> +        int desc_room = sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_mrg_rxbuf);
>>> +
>>> +        /* Allow consuming headroom but reserve enough space to push
>>> +         * the descriptor on if we get an XDP_TX return code.
>>> +         */
>>> +        xdp.data_hard_start = data - vi->headroom + desc_room;
>>> +        xdp.data = data + desc_room;
>>>           xdp.data_end = xdp.data + (len - vi->hdr_len);
>>> -        buf = data;
>>>       } else { /* small buffers */
>>>           struct sk_buff *skb = data;
>>>   -        xdp.data = skb->data;
>>> +        xdp.data_hard_start = skb->data;
>>> +        xdp.data = skb->data + vi->headroom;
>>>           xdp.data_end = xdp.data + len;
>>> -        buf = skb->data;
>>>       }
>>>         act = bpf_prog_run_xdp(xdp_prog, &xdp);
>>>       switch (act) {
>>>       case XDP_PASS:
>>> +        if (!vi->mergeable_rx_bufs)
>>> +            __skb_pull((struct sk_buff *) data,
>>> +                   xdp.data - xdp.data_hard_start);
>>
>> Instead of doing things here and virtnet_xdp_xmit(). How about always making
>> skb->data point to the buffer head like:
>>
>> 1) reserve headroom in add_recvbuf_small()
>> 2) skb_push(xdp->data - xdp_data_hard_start, skb) if we detect xdp->data was
>> modified afer bpf_prog_run_xdp()
>>
>> Then there's no special code in either XDP_PASS or XDP_TX?
>>
> 
> Sure. Works for me and avoids if/else code.
> 
>>>           return XDP_PASS;
>>>       case XDP_TX:
>>>           qp = vi->curr_queue_pairs -
>>>               vi->xdp_queue_pairs +
>>>               smp_processor_id();
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> +#define VIRTIO_XDP_HEADROOM 256
>>> +
>>>   static int virtnet_xdp_set(struct net_device *dev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>>   {
>>>       unsigned long int max_sz = PAGE_SIZE - sizeof(struct padded_vnet_hdr);
>>>       struct virtnet_info *vi = netdev_priv(dev);
>>>       struct bpf_prog *old_prog;
>>>       u16 xdp_qp = 0, curr_qp;
>>> +    unsigned int old_hr;
>>>       int i, err;
>>>         if (virtio_has_feature(vi->vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_TSO4) ||
>>> @@ -1736,19 +1751,58 @@ static int virtnet_xdp_set(struct net_device *dev,
>>> struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>>           return -ENOMEM;
>>>       }
>>>   +    old_hr = vi->headroom;
>>> +    if (prog) {
>>> +        prog = bpf_prog_add(prog, vi->max_queue_pairs - 1);
>>> +        if (IS_ERR(prog))
>>> +            return PTR_ERR(prog);
>>> +        vi->headroom = VIRTIO_XDP_HEADROOM;
>>> +    } else {
>>> +        vi->headroom = 0;
>>> +    }
>>> +
>>> +    /* Changing the headroom in buffers is a disruptive operation because
>>> +     * existing buffers must be flushed and reallocated. This will happen
>>> +     * when a xdp program is initially added or xdp is disabled by removing
>>> +     * the xdp program.
>>> +     */
>>
>> We probably need reset the device here, but maybe Michale has more ideas. And if
>> we do this, another interesting thing to do is to disable EWMA and always use a
>> single page for each packet, this could almost eliminate linearizing.
> 
> Well with normal MTU 1500 size we should not hit the linearizing case right? The
> question is should we cap the MTU at GOOD_PACKET_LEN vs the current cap of
> (PAGE_SIZE - overhead).

Sorry responding to my own post with a bit more detail. I don't really like
going to a page for each packet because we end up with double the pages in use
for the "normal" 1500 MTU case. We could make the xdp allocation scheme smarter
and allocate a page per packet when MTU is greater than 2k instead of using the
EWMA but I would push those types of things at net-next and live with the
linearizing behavior for now or capping the MTU.

> 
>>
>> Thanks
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists