netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 bpf-next 00/15] xdp

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:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 14:16:01 +0100
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
To:     William Tu <u9012063@...il.com>,
        Toshiaki Makita <toshiaki.makita1@...il.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
        Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@...filter.org>,
        Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
        pravin shelar <pshelar@....org>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 bpf-next 00/15] xdp_flow: Flow offload to XDP

William Tu <u9012063@...il.com> writes:

> On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 2:06 AM Toshiaki Makita
> <toshiaki.makita1@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2019/11/13 2:50, William Tu wrote:
>> > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 5:32 PM Toshiaki Makita
>> > <toshiaki.makita1@...il.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 2019/10/28 4:17, David Miller wrote:
>> >>> From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
>> >>> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2019 16:24:24 +0100
>> >>>
>> >>>> The results in the paper also shows somewhat disappointing performance
>> >>>> for the eBPF implementation, but that is not too surprising given that
>> >>>> it's implemented as a TC eBPF hook, not an XDP program. I seem to recall
>> >>>> that this was also one of the things puzzling to me back when this was
>> >>>> presented...
>> >>>
>> >>> Also, no attempt was made to dyanamically optimize the data structures
>> >>> and code generated in response to features actually used.
>> >>>
>> >>> That's the big error.
>> >>>
>> >>> The full OVS key is huge, OVS is really quite a monster.
>> >>>
>> >>> But people don't use the entire key, nor do they use the totality of
>> >>> the data paths.
>> >>>
>> >>> So just doing a 1-to-1 translation of the OVS datapath into BPF makes
>> >>> absolutely no sense whatsoever and it is guaranteed to have worse
>> >>> performance.
>> >
>> > 1-to-1 translation has nothing to do with performance.
>>
>> I think at least key size matters.
>> One big part of hot spots in xdp_flow bpf program is hash table lookup.
>> Especially hash calculation by jhash and key comparison are heavy.
>> The computational cost heavily depends on key size.
>>
>> If umh can determine some keys won't be used in some way (not sure if it's
>> practical though), umh can load an XDP program which uses less sized
>> key. Also it can remove unnecessary key parser routines.
>> If it's possible, the performance will increase.
>>
> Yes, that's a good point.
> In other meeting people also gave me this suggestions.
>
> Basically it's "on-demand flow key parsing using eBPF"
> The key parsing consists of multiple eBPF programs, and
> based on the existing rules, load the program and parse minimum
> necessary fields required by existing rules. This will definitely
> have better performance.

See the xdp-filter program[0] for a simple example of how to do this
with pre-compiled BPF programs. Basically, what it does is generate
different versions of the same program with different subsets of
functionality included (through ifdefs). The feature set of each program
is saved as a feature bitmap, and the loader will dynamically select
which program to load based on which features the user enables at
runtime.

The nice thing about this is that it doesn't require dynamic program
generation, and everything can be compiled ahead of time. The drawback
is that you'll end up with a combinatorial explosion of program variants
if you want full granularity in your feature selection.

-Toke

[0] https://github.com/xdp-project/xdp-tools/tree/master/xdp-filter