netdev - Re: [bpf-next RFC 0/3] AF

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]

Message-ID: <CAJ+HfNj8M-GEceY0CJw-gMs6mjNaQsw-3nUggwtUTaxGtsuw6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Dec 2018 15:14:42 +0100
From:   Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
To:     William Tu <u9012063@...il.com>
Cc:     Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>, ast@...nel.org,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, makita.toshiaki@....ntt.co.jp,
        "Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [bpf-next RFC 0/3] AF_XDP support for veth.

Den mån 17 dec. 2018 kl 20:40 skrev William Tu <u9012063@...il.com>:
>
> The patch series adds AF_XDP async xmit support for veth device.
> First patch add a new API for supporting non-physical NIC device to get
> packet's virtual address.  The second patch implements the async xmit,
> and last patch adds example use cases.
>

The first virtual device with AF_XDP support! Yay!

This is only the zero-copy on the Tx side -- it's still allocations
plus copy on the ingress side? That's a bit different from the
i40e/ixgbe implementation, where zero-copy means both Tx and Rx. For
veth I don't see that we need to support Rx right away, especially for
Tx only sockets. Still, when the netdev has accepted the umem via
ndo_bpf, the zero-copy for both Tx and Rx is assumed. We might want to
change the ndo_bpf at some point to support zero-copy for Tx, Rx, Tx
*and* Rx.

Are you planning to add zero-copy to the ingress side, i.e. pulling
frames from the fill ring, instead of allocating via dev_alloc_page?
(The term *zero-copy* for veth is a bit weird, since we're still doing
copies, but eliding the page allocation. :-))

It would be interesting to hear a bit about what use-case veth/AF_XDP
has, if you can share that.


Cheers,
Björn

> I tested with 2 namespaces, one as sender, the other as receiver.
> The packet rate is measure at the receiver side.
>   ip netns add at_ns0
>   ip link add p0 type veth peer name p1
>   ip link set p0 netns at_ns0
>   ip link set dev p1 up
>   ip netns exec at_ns0 ip link set dev p0 up
>
>   # receiver
>   ip netns exec at_ns0 xdp_rxq_info --dev p0 --action XDP_DROP
>
>   # sender with AF_XDP
>   xdpsock -i p1 -t -N -z
>
>   # or sender without AF_XDP
>   xdpsock -i p1 -t -S
>
> Without AF_XDP: 724 Kpps
> RXQ stats       RXQ:CPU pps         issue-pps
> rx_queue_index    0:1   724339      0
> rx_queue_index    0:sum 724339
>
> With AF_XDP: 1.1 Mpps (with ksoftirqd 100% cpu)
> RXQ stats       RXQ:CPU pps         issue-pps
> rx_queue_index    0:3   1188181     0
> rx_queue_index    0:sum 1188181
>
> William Tu (3):
>   xsk: add xsk_umem_consume_tx_virtual.
>   veth: support AF_XDP.
>   samples: bpf: add veth AF_XDP example.
>
>  drivers/net/veth.c             | 247 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  include/net/xdp_sock.h         |   7 ++
>  net/xdp/xsk.c                  |  24 ++++
>  samples/bpf/test_veth_afxdp.sh |  67 +++++++++++
>  4 files changed, 343 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100755 samples/bpf/test_veth_afxdp.sh
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>