netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support

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]
Date:   Thu, 8 Nov 2018 23:00:28 -0500
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:     Tiwei Bie <tiwei.bie@...el.com>,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org, wexu@...hat.com,
        jfreimann@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/5] virtio_ring: add packed ring support

On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 10:30:50AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> 
> On 2018/11/8 下午11:56, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 07:51:48PM +0800, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> > > On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 04:18:25PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> > > > On 2018/11/8 上午9:38, Tiwei Bie wrote:
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +	if (vq->vq.num_free < descs_used) {
> > > > > > > +		pr_debug("Can't add buf len %i - avail = %i\n",
> > > > > > > +			 descs_used, vq->vq.num_free);
> > > > > > > +		/* FIXME: for historical reasons, we force a notify here if
> > > > > > > +		 * there are outgoing parts to the buffer.  Presumably the
> > > > > > > +		 * host should service the ring ASAP. */
> > > > > > I don't think we have a reason to do this for packed ring.
> > > > > > No historical baggage there, right?
> > > > > Based on the original commit log, it seems that the notify here
> > > > > is just an "optimization". But I don't quite understand what does
> > > > > the "the heuristics which KVM uses" refer to. If it's safe to drop
> > > > > this in packed ring, I'd like to do it.
> > > > 
> > > > According to the commit log, it seems like a workaround of lguest networking
> > > > backend.
> > > Do you know why removing this notify in Tx will break "the
> > > heuristics which KVM uses"? Or what does "the heuristics
> > > which KVM uses" refer to?
> > Yes. QEMU has a mode where it disables notifications and processes TX
> > ring periodically from a timer.  It's off by default but used to be on
> > by default a long time ago. If ring becomes full this causes traffic
> > stalls.
> 
> 
> Do you mean tx-timer? If yes, we can still enable it for packed ring

Yes we can but I doubt anyone does.

> and the
> timer will finally fired and we can go.

on tx ring full we probably don't want to wait for timer.
But I think we can just prevent qemu from using tx timer
with virtio 1.

> 
> > As a work-around Rusty put in this hack to kick on ring full
> > even with notifications disabled.
> 
> 
> From the commit log it looks more like a performance workaround instead of a
> bug fix.

it's a quality of implementation issue, yes.

> 
> > It's easy enough to make sure QEMU
> > does not combine devices with packed ring support with the timer hack.
> > And I am guessing it's safe enough to also block that option completely
> > e.g. when virtio 1.0 is enabled.
> 
> 
> I agree.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> > > > I agree to drop it, we should not have such burden.
> > > > 
> > > > But we should notice that, with this removed, the compare between packed vs
> > > > split is kind of unfair. Consider the removal of lguest support recently,
> > > > maybe we can drop this for split ring as well?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > > commit 44653eae1407f79dff6f52fcf594ae84cb165ec4
> > > > > Author: Rusty Russell<rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
> > > > > Date:   Fri Jul 25 12:06:04 2008 -0500
> > > > > 
> > > > >       virtio: don't always force a notification when ring is full
> > > > >       We force notification when the ring is full, even if the host has
> > > > >       indicated it doesn't want to know.  This seemed like a good idea at
> > > > >       the time: if we fill the transmit ring, we should tell the host
> > > > >       immediately.
> > > > >       Unfortunately this logic also applies to the receiving ring, which is
> > > > >       refilled constantly.  We should introduce real notification thesholds
> > > > >       to replace this logic.  Meanwhile, removing the logic altogether breaks
> > > > >       the heuristics which KVM uses, so we use a hack: only notify if there are
> > > > >       outgoing parts of the new buffer.
> > > > >       Here are the number of exits with lguest's crappy network implementation:
> > > > >       Before:
> > > > >               network xmit 7859051 recv 236420
> > > > >       After:
> > > > >               network xmit 7858610 recv 118136
> > > > >       Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell<rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > > > > index 72bf8bc09014..21d9a62767af 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > > > > @@ -87,8 +87,11 @@ static int vring_add_buf(struct virtqueue *_vq,
> > > > >    	if (vq->num_free < out + in) {
> > > > >    		pr_debug("Can't add buf len %i - avail = %i\n",
> > > > >    			 out + in, vq->num_free);
> > > > > -		/* We notify*even if*  VRING_USED_F_NO_NOTIFY is set here. */
> > > > > -		vq->notify(&vq->vq);
> > > > > +		/* FIXME: for historical reasons, we force a notify here if
> > > > > +		 * there are outgoing parts to the buffer.  Presumably the
> > > > > +		 * host should service the ring ASAP. */
> > > > > +		if (out)
> > > > > +			vq->notify(&vq->vq);
> > > > >    		END_USE(vq);
> > > > >    		return -ENOSPC;
> > > > >    	}
> > > > > 
> > > > >