| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <1519955233-13070-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 03:49:45 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [RFC PATCH v3] ptr_ring: linked list fallback
So pointer rings work fine, but they have a problem: make them too small
and not enough entries fit. Make them too large and you start flushing
your cache and running out of memory.
This is a new idea of mine: a ring backed by a linked list. Once you run
out of ring entries, instead of a drop you fall back on a list with a
common lock.
Should work well for the case where the ring is typically sized
correctly, but will help address the fact that some user try to set e.g.
tx queue length to 1000000.
In other words, the idea is that if a user sets a really huge TX queue
length, we allocate a ptr_ring which is smaller, and use the backup
linked list when necessary to provide the requested TX queue length
legitimately.
My hope this will move us closer to direction where e.g. fw codel can
use ptr rings without locking at all. The API is still very rough, and
I really need to take a hard look at lock nesting.
As was pointed out, this approach only brings benefits if ring
is rarely completely full. Whether that's common remains to be seen.
Compiled only, sending for early feedback/flames.
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com>
---
include/linux/ptr_ring.h | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/ptr_ring.h b/include/linux/ptr_ring.h
index e633522..aadb751 100644
--- a/include/linux/ptr_ring.h
+++ b/include/linux/ptr_ring.h
@@ -31,16 +31,25 @@
#include <asm/errno.h>
#endif
+/* entries must start with the following structure */
+struct plist {
+ struct plist *next;
+ struct plist *last; /* only valid in the 1st entry */
+};
+
struct ptr_ring {
int producer ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
spinlock_t producer_lock;
int consumer_head ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp; /* next valid entry */
int consumer_tail; /* next entry to invalidate */
+ struct plist *consumer_list;
+ int list_num;
spinlock_t consumer_lock;
/* Shared consumer/producer data */
/* Read-only by both the producer and the consumer */
int size ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp; /* max entries in queue */
int batch; /* number of entries to consume in a batch */
+ int list_size;
void **queue;
};
@@ -121,10 +130,42 @@ static inline int __ptr_ring_produce(struct ptr_ring *r, void *ptr)
}
/*
- * Note: resize (below) nests producer lock within consumer lock, so if you
- * consume in interrupt or BH context, you must disable interrupts/BH when
- * calling this.
+ * Note: resize API with the _fallback should be used when calling this.
*/
+static inline int ptr_ring_produce_fallback(struct ptr_ring *r, void *ptr)
+{
+ int ret;
+ unsigned long flags;
+ struct plist *p = ptr;
+
+ p->next = NULL;
+ p->last = p;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&r->producer_lock, flags);
+ ret = __ptr_ring_produce(r, ptr);
+ if (ret && r->list_size) {
+ spin_lock(&r->consumer_lock);
+ ret = __ptr_ring_produce(r, ptr);
+ if (ret && r->list_num < r->list_size) {
+ int producer = r->producer ? r->producer - 1 :
+ r->size - 1;
+ struct plist *first = r->queue[producer];
+
+ BUG_ON(!first);
+
+ first->last->next = p;
+ first->last = p;
+
+ r->list_num++;
+ }
+ spin_unlock(&r->consumer_lock);
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&r->producer_lock, flags);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
static inline int ptr_ring_produce(struct ptr_ring *r, void *ptr)
{
int ret;
@@ -136,6 +177,7 @@ static inline int ptr_ring_produce(struct ptr_ring *r, void *ptr)
return ret;
}
+
static inline int ptr_ring_produce_irq(struct ptr_ring *r, void *ptr)
{
int ret;
@@ -372,6 +414,27 @@ static inline void *ptr_ring_consume_bh(struct ptr_ring *r)
return ptr;
}
+static inline void *ptr_ring_consume_fallback(struct ptr_ring *r)
+{
+ unsigned long flags;
+ struct plist *ptr;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&r->consumer_lock, flags);
+ if (r->consumer_list) {
+ ptr = r->consumer_list;
+ r->consumer_list = ptr->next;
+ r->list_num--;
+ } else {
+ ptr = __ptr_ring_consume(r);
+ if (ptr) {
+ r->consumer_list = ptr->next;
+ }
+ }
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&r->consumer_lock, flags);
+
+ return ptr;
+}
+
static inline int ptr_ring_consume_batched(struct ptr_ring *r,
void **array, int n)
{
@@ -487,7 +550,8 @@ static inline void __ptr_ring_set_size(struct ptr_ring *r, int size)
r->batch = 1;
}
-static inline int ptr_ring_init(struct ptr_ring *r, int size, gfp_t gfp)
+static inline int ptr_ring_init_fallback(struct ptr_ring *r, int size, gfp_t gfp,
+ int fallback_size)
{
r->queue = __ptr_ring_init_queue_alloc(size, gfp);
if (!r->queue)
@@ -497,10 +561,17 @@ static inline int ptr_ring_init(struct ptr_ring *r, int size, gfp_t gfp)
r->producer = r->consumer_head = r->consumer_tail = 0;
spin_lock_init(&r->producer_lock);
spin_lock_init(&r->consumer_lock);
+ r->list_size = fallback_size;
+ r->consumer_list = NULL;
return 0;
}
+static inline int ptr_ring_init(struct ptr_ring *r, int size, gfp_t gfp)
+{
+ return ptr_ring_init_fallback(r, size, gfp, 0);
+}
+
/*
* Return entries into ring. Destroy entries that don't fit.
*
--
MST
Powered by blists - more mailing lists