netdev - Re: [Linuxarm] Re: [RFC v2] net: sched: implement TCQ_F_CAN

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, 18 Mar 2021 15:33:04 +0800
From:   Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
To:     "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
CC:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "Wei Wang" <weiwan@...gle.com>,
        "Cong Wang ." <cong.wang@...edance.com>,
        Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linuxarm@...neuler.org>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Linuxarm] Re: [RFC v2] net: sched: implement TCQ_F_CAN_BYPASS
 for lockless qdisc

On 2021/3/17 21:45, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
> On 3/17/21, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com> wrote:
>> Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 2:07 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I thought pfifo was supposed to be "lockless" and this change
>>>> re-introduces a lock between producer and consumer, no?
>>>
>>> It has never been truly lockless, it uses two spinlocks in the ring
>>> buffer
>>> implementation, and it introduced a q->seqlock recently, with this patch
>>> now we have priv->lock, 4 locks in total. So our "lockless" qdisc ends
>>> up having more locks than others. ;) I don't think we are going to a
>>> right direction...
>>
>> Just a thought, have you guys considered adopting the lockless MSPC ring
>> buffer recently introduced into Wireguard in commit:
>>
>> 8b5553ace83c ("wireguard: queueing: get rid of per-peer ring buffers")
>>
>> Jason indicated he was willing to work on generalising it into a
>> reusable library if there was a use case for it. I haven't quite though
>> through the details of whether this would be such a use case, but
>> figured I'd at least mention it :)
> 
> That offer definitely still stands. Generalization sounds like a lot of fun.
> 
> Keep in mind though that it's an eventually consistent queue, not an
> immediately consistent one, so that might not match all use cases. It
> works with wg because we always trigger the reader thread anew when it
> finishes, but that doesn't apply to everyone's queueing setup.

Thanks for mentioning this.

"multi-producer, single-consumer" seems to match the lockless qdisc's
paradigm too, for now concurrent enqueuing/dequeuing to the pfifo_fast's
queues() is not allowed, it is protected by producer_lock or consumer_lock.

So it would be good to has lockless concurrent enqueuing, while dequeuing
can be protected by qdisc_lock() or q->seqlock, which meets the "multi-producer,
single-consumer" paradigm.

But right now lockless qdisc has some packet stuck problem, which I tried to
fix in [1].

If the packet stuck problem for lockless qdisc can be fixed, and we can do
more optimization on lockless qdisc, including the one you mention:)

1.https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/1616050402-37023-1-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com/

> _______________________________________________
> Linuxarm mailing list -- linuxarm@...neuler.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to linuxarm-leave@...neuler.org
>