| 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: <db40af0f-e93f-f47e-de9e-7eab02c9caa8@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2019 16:28:17 +0000
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
To: Brian Vazquez <brianvv.kernel@...il.com>
CC: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>,
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
"Brian Vazquez" <brianvv@...gle.com>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: adding map batch processing
support
On 9/23/19 4:20 PM, Brian Vazquez wrote:
> Hi Yonghong, thanks for working on this!
>
> I have some concerns about this implementation but overall I think
> this might work for our use case too!
Thanks for reviewing the patch. I will get back to this very soon.
>
> On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 1:11 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@...com> wrote:
>>
>> Brian Vazquez has proposed BPF_MAP_DUMP command to look up more than one
>> map entries per syscall.
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CABCgpaU3xxX6CMMxD+1knApivtc2jLBHysDXw-0E9bQEL0qC3A@mail.gmail.com/T/#t
>>
>> During discussion, we found more use cases can be supported in a similar
>> map operation batching framework. For example, batched map lookup and delete,
>> which can be really helpful for bcc.
>> https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/master/tools/tcptop.py#L233-L243
>> https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/master/tools/slabratetop.py#L129-L138
>>
>> Also, in bcc, we have API to delete all entries in a map.
>> https://github.com/iovisor/bcc/blob/master/src/cc/api/BPFTable.h#L257-L264
>>
>> For map update, batched operations also useful as sometimes applications need
>> to populate initial maps with more than one entry. For example, the below
>> example is from kernel/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_cpu_user.c:
>> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/samples/bpf/xdp_redirect_cpu_user.c#L543-L550
>>
>> This patch addresses all the above use cases. To make uapi stable, it also
>> covers other potential use cases. For bpf syscall subcommands are introduced:
>> BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH
>> BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_AND_DELETE_BATCH
>> BPF_MAP_UPDATE_BATCH
>> BPF_MAP_DELETE_BATCH
>>
>> The UAPI attribute structure looks like:
>>
>> struct { /* struct used by BPF_MAP_*_BATCH commands */
>> __u64 batch; /* input/output:
>> * input: start batch,
>> * 0 to start from beginning.
>> * output: next start batch,
>> * 0 to end batching.
>> */
>> __aligned_u64 keys;
>> __aligned_u64 values;
>> __u32 count; /* input/output:
>> * input: # of elements keys/values.
>> * output: # of filled elements.
>> */
>> __u32 map_fd;
>> __u64 elem_flags;
>> __u64 flags;
>> } batch;
>>
>> An opaque value 'batch' is used for user/kernel space communication
>> for where in the map to start the operation for lookup/lookup_and_delete/delete.
>> input 'batch' = 0: to start the operation from the beginning of the map.
>> output 'batch': if not 0, the next input for batch operation.
>>
>> For lookup/lookup_and_delete:
>> operation: lookup/lookup_and_delete starting from a particular 'batch'.
>> return:
>> 'batch' 'count' return code meaning
>> 0 0 0 Done. Nothing left
>> 0 0 -ENOSPC no space to handle batch 0
>> > 0 0 -ENOSPC no space to handle 'batch'
>> > 0 > 0 0 stopped right before 'batch'
>> Note that:
>> (1). Even if return code is 0 and return 'count' > 0, the return 'count' may
>> not be equal to input 'count'. This happens when there is no enough space
>> to handle a batch.
>> (2). If the return code is an error and not -EFAULT,
>> 'batch' indicates the batch has issues and 'count' indicates the number
>> of elements successfully processed.
>>
>> For delete:
>> operation: deletion starting from a particular 'batch'.
>> return: 0 means everything is deleted from 'batch'.
>> error code means something deletion not happening.
>>
>> For update:
>> operation: update 'count' number of elements in 'keys'/'values'.
>> return: 0 means successful updates for all elements.
>> error code, if not -EFAULT, 'count' is the number of successful updates.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/bpf.h | 9 ++
>> include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 22 +++
>> kernel/bpf/hashtab.c | 324 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 68 ++++++++
>> 4 files changed, 423 insertions(+)
>>
[...]
>> +static int
>> +__htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(struct bpf_map *map,
>> + const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr,
>> + bool do_delete, bool is_lru_map)
>> +{
>> + struct bpf_htab *htab = container_of(map, struct bpf_htab, map);
>> + u32 bucket_cnt, total, key_size, value_size, roundup_key_size;
>> + void *keys = NULL, *values = NULL, *value, *dst_key, *dst_val;
>> + u64 elem_map_flags, map_flags;
>> + struct hlist_nulls_head *head;
>> + void __user *ukeys, *uvalues;
>> + struct hlist_nulls_node *n;
>> + u32 batch, max_count;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + struct htab_elem *l;
>> + struct bucket *b;
>> + int ret = 0;
>> +
>> + max_count = attr->batch.count;
>> + if (!max_count)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + elem_map_flags = attr->batch.elem_flags;
>> + if ((elem_map_flags & ~BPF_F_LOCK) ||
>> + ((elem_map_flags & BPF_F_LOCK) && !map_value_has_spin_lock(map)))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + map_flags = attr->batch.flags;
>> + if (map_flags)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + batch = (u32)attr->batch.batch;
>> + if (batch >= htab->n_buckets)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + /* We cannot do copy_from_user or copy_to_user inside
>> + * the rcu_read_lock. Allocate enough space here.
>> + */
>> + key_size = htab->map.key_size;
>> + roundup_key_size = round_up(htab->map.key_size, 8);
>> + value_size = htab->map.value_size;
>> + keys = kvmalloc(key_size * max_count, GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN);
>> + values = kvmalloc(value_size * max_count, GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN);
>> + if (!keys || !values) {
>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> +
>> + dst_key = keys;
>> + dst_val = values;
>> + total = 0;
>> +
>> + preempt_disable();
>> + this_cpu_inc(bpf_prog_active);
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> +
>> +again:
>> + b = &htab->buckets[batch];
>> + head = &b->head;
>> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&b->lock, flags);
>> +
>
> Would it be possible to avoid that lock when we're not deleting (just
> batching lookup)? To be honest I don't how much impact would have to
> grab that lock when concurrent additions are happening in a bpf
> program.
Yes, it is possible.
Another reason I took the lock to ensure that when I tested
that bucket_cnt is smaller or equal to the remaining buffer size,
it should remain that way during subsequent elem copying.
Without lock, if in parallel some updates added some
elements and there will be no enough space to copy.
But on the other hand, I think it is okay to just stop
when the buffer is full and miss a few elements.
>
>> + bucket_cnt = 0;
>> + hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(l, n, head, hash_node)
>> + bucket_cnt++;
>> +
>> + if (bucket_cnt > (max_count - total)) {
>> + if (total == 0)
>> + ret = -ENOSPC;
>> + goto after_loop;
>> + }
>> +
>> + hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(l, n, head, hash_node) {
>> + memcpy(dst_key, l->key, key_size);
>> +
>> + value = l->key + roundup_key_size;
>> + if (elem_map_flags & BPF_F_LOCK)
>> + copy_map_value_locked(map, dst_val, value, true);
>> + else
>> + copy_map_value(map, dst_val, value);
>> + check_and_init_map_lock(map, dst_val);
>> +
>> + dst_key += key_size;
>> + dst_val += value_size;
>> + total++;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (do_delete) {
>> + hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(l, n, head, hash_node) {
>> + hlist_nulls_del_rcu(&l->hash_node);
>> + if (is_lru_map)
>> + bpf_lru_push_free(&htab->lru, &l->lru_node);
>> + else
>> + free_htab_elem(htab, l);
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + batch++;
>> + if (batch >= htab->n_buckets) {
>> + batch = 0;
>> + goto after_loop;
>> + }
>> +
>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&b->lock, flags);
>> + goto again;
>> +
>> +after_loop:
>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&b->lock, flags);
>> +
>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>> + this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
>> + preempt_enable();
>> +
>> + /* copy data back to user */
>> + ukeys = u64_to_user_ptr(attr->batch.keys);
>> + uvalues = u64_to_user_ptr(attr->batch.values);
>> + if (put_user(batch, &uattr->batch.batch) ||
>> + copy_to_user(ukeys, keys, total * key_size) ||
>> + copy_to_user(uvalues, values, total * value_size) ||
>> + put_user(total, &uattr->batch.count))
>> + ret = -EFAULT;
>> +
>> +out:
>> + kvfree(keys);
>> + kvfree(values);
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +__htab_map_update_batch(struct bpf_map *map, const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr, bool is_lru_map)
>> +{
>> + struct bpf_htab *htab = container_of(map, struct bpf_htab, map);
>> + u32 count, max_count, key_size, roundup_key_size, value_size;
>> + u64 elem_map_flags, map_flags;
>> + void __user *ukey, *uvalue;
>> + void *key, *value;
>> + int ret = 0;
>> +
>> + max_count = attr->batch.count;
>> + if (!max_count)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + elem_map_flags = attr->batch.elem_flags;
>> + if ((elem_map_flags & BPF_F_LOCK) && !map_value_has_spin_lock(map))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + map_flags = attr->batch.flags;
>> + if (map_flags)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + key_size = htab->map.key_size;
>> + roundup_key_size = round_up(htab->map.key_size, 8);
>> + value_size = htab->map.value_size;
>> + key = kmalloc(key_size, GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN);
>> + value = kmalloc(value_size, GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN);
>> + if (!key || !value) {
>> + ret = -ENOMEM;
>> + goto out;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ukey = u64_to_user_ptr(attr->batch.keys);
>> + uvalue = u64_to_user_ptr(attr->batch.values);
>> + for (count = 0; count < max_count; count++) {
>> + if (copy_from_user(key, ukey + count * key_size, key_size) ||
>> + copy_from_user(value, uvalue + count * value_size, value_size)) {
>> + ret = -EFAULT;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> +
>> + preempt_disable();
>> + __this_cpu_inc(bpf_prog_active);
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> + if (is_lru_map)
>> + ret = htab_lru_map_update_elem(map, key, value, elem_map_flags);
>> + else
>> + ret = htab_map_update_elem(map, key, value, elem_map_flags);
>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>> + __this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
>> + preempt_enable();
>> +
>> + if (ret) {
>> + if (put_user(count, &uattr->batch.count))
>> + ret = -EFAULT;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> +out:
>> + kfree(key);
>> + kfree(value);
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +__htab_map_delete_batch(struct bpf_map *map,
>> + const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr,
>> + bool is_lru_map)
>> +{
>> + struct bpf_htab *htab = container_of(map, struct bpf_htab, map);
>> + u64 elem_map_flags, map_flags;
>> + struct hlist_nulls_head *head;
>> + struct hlist_nulls_node *n;
>> + u32 batch, max_count;
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + struct htab_elem *l;
>> + struct bucket *b;
>> +
>> + elem_map_flags = attr->batch.elem_flags;
>> + map_flags = attr->batch.flags;
>> + if (elem_map_flags || map_flags)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + max_count = attr->batch.count;
>> + batch = (u32)attr->batch.batch;
>> + if (max_count || batch >= htab->n_buckets)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + preempt_disable();
>> + __this_cpu_inc(bpf_prog_active);
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> +
>> +again:
>> + b = &htab->buckets[batch];
>> + head = &b->head;
>> + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&b->lock, flags);
>> +
>> + hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(l, n, head, hash_node) {
>> + hlist_nulls_del_rcu(&l->hash_node);
>> + if (is_lru_map)
>> + bpf_lru_push_free(&htab->lru, &l->lru_node);
>> + else
>> + free_htab_elem(htab, l);
>> + }
>> +
>> + batch++;
>> + if (batch >= htab->n_buckets)
>> + goto out;
>> +
>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&b->lock, flags);
>> + goto again;
>> +
>> +out:
>> + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&b->lock, flags);
>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>> + __this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
>> + preempt_enable();
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_map_lookup_batch(struct bpf_map *map, const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(map, attr, uattr, false,
>> + false);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(struct bpf_map *map,
>> + const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(map, attr, uattr, true,
>> + false);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_map_update_batch(struct bpf_map *map, const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_update_batch(map, attr, uattr, false);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_map_delete_batch(struct bpf_map *map,
>> + const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_delete_batch(map, attr, uattr, false);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_lru_map_lookup_batch(struct bpf_map *map, const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(map, attr, uattr, false,
>> + true);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_lru_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(struct bpf_map *map,
>> + const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(map, attr, uattr, true,
>> + true);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_lru_map_update_batch(struct bpf_map *map, const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_update_batch(map, attr, uattr, true);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +htab_lru_map_delete_batch(struct bpf_map *map,
>> + const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>> +{
>> + return __htab_map_delete_batch(map, attr, uattr, true);
>> +}
>> +
>> const struct bpf_map_ops htab_map_ops = {
>> .map_alloc_check = htab_map_alloc_check,
>> .map_alloc = htab_map_alloc,
>> @@ -1242,6 +1558,10 @@ const struct bpf_map_ops htab_map_ops = {
>> .map_delete_elem = htab_map_delete_elem,
>> .map_gen_lookup = htab_map_gen_lookup,
>> .map_seq_show_elem = htab_map_seq_show_elem,
>> + .map_lookup_batch = htab_map_lookup_batch,
>> + .map_lookup_and_delete_batch = htab_map_lookup_and_delete_batch,
>> + .map_update_batch = htab_map_update_batch,
>> + .map_delete_batch = htab_map_delete_batch,
>> };
>>
>> const struct bpf_map_ops htab_lru_map_ops = {
>> @@ -1255,6 +1575,10 @@ const struct bpf_map_ops htab_lru_map_ops = {
>> .map_delete_elem = htab_lru_map_delete_elem,
>> .map_gen_lookup = htab_lru_map_gen_lookup,
>> .map_seq_show_elem = htab_map_seq_show_elem,
>> + .map_lookup_batch = htab_lru_map_lookup_batch,
>> + .map_lookup_and_delete_batch = htab_lru_map_lookup_and_delete_batch,
>> + .map_update_batch = htab_lru_map_update_batch,
>> + .map_delete_batch = htab_lru_map_delete_batch,
>> };
>>
>> /* Called from eBPF program */
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
>> index ca60eafa6922..e83bdf7efbd8 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
>> @@ -2816,6 +2816,62 @@ static int bpf_task_fd_query(const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> return err;
>> }
>>
>> +#define BPF_MAP_BATCH_LAST_FIELD batch.flags
>> +
>> +#define BPF_DO_BATCH(fn) \
>> + do { \
>> + if (!fn) { \
>> + err = -ENOTSUPP; \
>> + goto err_put; \
>> + } \
>> + err = fn(map, attr, uattr); \
>> + } while(0)
>> +
>> +static int bpf_map_do_batch(const union bpf_attr *attr,
>> + union bpf_attr __user *uattr,
>> + int cmd)
>> +{
>> + struct bpf_map *map;
>> + int err, ufd;
>> + struct fd f;
>> +
>> + if (CHECK_ATTR(BPF_MAP_BATCH))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + ufd = attr->batch.map_fd;
>> + f = fdget(ufd);
>> + map = __bpf_map_get(f);
>> + if (IS_ERR(map))
>> + return PTR_ERR(map);
>> +
>> + if ((cmd == BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH ||
>> + cmd == BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_AND_DELETE_BATCH) &&
>> + !(map_get_sys_perms(map, f) & FMODE_CAN_READ)) {
>> + err = -EPERM;
>> + goto err_put;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (cmd != BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH &&
>> + !(map_get_sys_perms(map, f) & FMODE_CAN_WRITE)) {
>> + err = -EPERM;
>> + goto err_put;
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (cmd == BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH) {
>> + BPF_DO_BATCH(map->ops->map_lookup_batch);
>> + } else if (cmd == BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_AND_DELETE_BATCH) {
>> + BPF_DO_BATCH(map->ops->map_lookup_and_delete_batch);
>> + } else if (cmd == BPF_MAP_UPDATE_BATCH) {
>> + BPF_DO_BATCH(map->ops->map_update_batch);
>> + } else {
>> + BPF_DO_BATCH(map->ops->map_delete_batch);
>> + }
>> +
>> +err_put:
>> + fdput(f);
>> + return err;
>> +}
>> +
>> SYSCALL_DEFINE3(bpf, int, cmd, union bpf_attr __user *, uattr, unsigned int, size)
>> {
>> union bpf_attr attr = {};
>> @@ -2913,6 +2969,18 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(bpf, int, cmd, union bpf_attr __user *, uattr, unsigned int, siz
>> case BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_AND_DELETE_ELEM:
>> err = map_lookup_and_delete_elem(&attr);
>> break;
>> + case BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH:
>> + err = bpf_map_do_batch(&attr, uattr, BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_BATCH);
>> + break;
>> + case BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_AND_DELETE_BATCH:
>> + err = bpf_map_do_batch(&attr, uattr, BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_AND_DELETE_BATCH);
>> + break;
>> + case BPF_MAP_UPDATE_BATCH:
>> + err = bpf_map_do_batch(&attr, uattr, BPF_MAP_UPDATE_BATCH);
>> + break;
>> + case BPF_MAP_DELETE_BATCH:
>> + err = bpf_map_do_batch(&attr, uattr, BPF_MAP_DELETE_BATCH);
>> + break;
>> default:
>> err = -EINVAL;
>> break;
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
>
> In general it'd be great if we could express the old functions
> (get_next_key, lookup, delete) in terms of this new ones so we avoid
> having twice the code.
They do share some initial checkings at least. Let me check how I can do
this.
>
> Also to be honest I don't see how batching updates would be useful,
> maybe just try to do batching lookup and lookup_and_delete?
We do have a use case for batching updates.
Internally we have a bpf based firewall. it uses map-in-map.
The inner map is a hash table with thousands of entries.
Periodically some user space alerts will trigger firewall
rule changes. In this case, the new map is prepared
and thousands of bpf update syscalls are called to
update the new map. Once the new map is ready,
a final update into outer map will enable using the
new map.
Replacing these thousands map update syscalls with just
one map batch update is still a very good optimization.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists