netdev - Re: [patch net-next v2 00/20] net: sched: convert cls ndo_setup

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: <CAKgT0UeR8t3C82cQo9er4zkQy7PH36H4r84WA7V7HLOavY7RGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2017 09:24:01 -0700
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>,
        Ganesh Goudar <ganeshgr@...lsio.com>,
        Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
        Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
        Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...lanox.com>, idosch@...lanox.com,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>,
        pieter.jansenvanvuuren@...ronome.com, john.hurley@...ronome.com,
        "Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
        Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2 00/20] net: sched: convert cls ndo_setup_tc
 offload calls to per-block callbacks

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Alexander Duyck
<alexander.duyck@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 7:04 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
>> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:50:28 +0200
>>
>>> This patchset is a bit bigger, but most of the patches are doing the
>>> same changes in multiple classifiers and drivers. I could do some
>>> squashes, but I think it is better split.
>>>
>>> This is another dependency on the way to shared block implementation.
>>> The goal is to remove use of tp->q in classifiers code.
>>>
>>> Also, this provides drivers possibility to track binding of blocks to
>>> qdiscs. Legacy drivers which do not support shared block offloading.
>>> register one callback per binding. That maintains the current
>>> functionality we have with ndo_setup_tc. Drivers which support block
>>> sharing offload register one callback per block which safes overhead.
>>>
>>> Patches 1-4 introduce the binding notifications and per-block callbacks
>>> Patches 5-8 add block callbacks calls to classifiers
>>> Patches 9-17 do convert from ndo_setup_tc calls to block callbacks for
>>>              classifier offloads in drivers
>>> Patches 18-20 do cleanup
>>
>> Series applied.
>
> We are getting internal reports of regressions being seen with this
> patch set applied. Specifically the issues below have been pointed out
> to me. My understanding is that these issues are all being reported on
> ixgbe:
>
> 1.       To offload filter into HW, the hw-tc-offload feature flag has
> to be turned on before creating the ingress qdisc.
>
> Previously, this could also be turned on after the qdisc was created
> and the filters could still be offloaded. Looks like this is because,
> previously the offload flag was checked as a part of filter
> integration in the classifier, and now it is checked as part of qdisc
> creation (ingress_init). So, if no offload capability is advertised at
> ingress qdisc creation time then hardware will not be asked to offload
> filters later if the flag is enabled.
>
> 2.       Deleting the ingress qdisc fails to remove filters added in
> HW. Filters in SW gets deleted.
>
> We haven’t exactly root-caused this, the changes being extensive, but
> our guess is again something wrong with the offload check or similar
> while unregistering the block callback (tcf_block_cb_unregister) and
> further to the classifier (CLS_U32/CLS_FLOWER etc.) with the
> DESTROY/REMOVE command.
>
> 3.       Deleting u32 filters using handle fails to remove filter from
> HW, filter in SW gets deleted.
>
> Probably similar reasons, also we see some u32 specific patches as
> well for remove nodes.
>
> We are still digging into this further, but wanted to put this out
> there so we can address the issues before we go much further down this
> path.
>
> Thanks.
>
> - Alex

So a quick update. Item 3 is no longer an issue, it was a
configuration issue on our side. So only items 1 and 2 are left to be
addressed.

Thanks.

- Alex