[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQLz0ojicbKS4LSjCCb5yaK9xKzB0MEJNYzb+Z6bVAFt4g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 09:16:27 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
"Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall
handling in JIT
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 4:02 AM Maciej Fijalkowski
<maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 07:16:24PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 01:06:07AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > > > + ret = bpf_arch_text_poke(poke->tailcall_bypass,
> > > > + BPF_MOD_JUMP,
> > > > + NULL, bypass_addr);
> > > > + BUG_ON(ret < 0 && ret != -EINVAL);
> > > > + /* let other CPUs finish the execution of program
> > > > + * so that it will not possible to expose them
> > > > + * to invalid nop, stack unwind, nop state
> > > > + */
> > > > + synchronize_rcu();
> > >
> > > Very heavyweight that we need to potentially call this /multiple/ times for just a
> > > /single/ map update under poke mutex even ... but agree it's needed here to avoid
> > > racing. :(
> >
> > Yeah. I wasn't clear with my suggestion earlier.
> > I meant to say that synchronize_rcu() can be done between two loops.
> > list_for_each_entry(elem, &aux->poke_progs, list)
> > for (i = 0; i < elem->aux->size_poke_tab; i++)
> > bpf_arch_text_poke(poke->tailcall_bypass, ...
> > synchronize_rcu();
> > list_for_each_entry(elem, &aux->poke_progs, list)
> > for (i = 0; i < elem->aux->size_poke_tab; i++)
> > bpf_arch_text_poke(poke->poke->tailcall_target, ...
> >
> > Not sure how much better it will be though.
> > text_poke is heavy.
> > I think it's heavier than synchronize_rcu().
> > Long term we can do batch of text_poke-s.
>
> Yeah since we introduce another poke target we could come up with
> preparing the vector of pokes as you're saying?
yes. eventually. Pls keep it simple for now.
The logic is already quite complex.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists