netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: clarify flags in ringbuf helpers

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]

Message-ID: <CAKY_9u0KV0dW2_xW9g67r9YWAh9UjVpTAsEVWs3xF2htzzVAYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Apr 2021 17:10:41 -0300
From:   Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...il.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Cc:     Joe Stringer <joe@...ium.io>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>,
        "open list:BPF (Safe dynamic programs and tools)" 
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:BPF (Safe dynamic programs and tools)" 
        <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: clarify flags in ringbuf helpers

Em qua., 7 de abr. de 2021 às 16:58, Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> escreveu:
>
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 11:43 AM Joe Stringer <joe@...ium.io> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Pedro,
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2021 at 11:58 AM Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > In 'bpf_ringbuf_reserve()' we require the flag to '0' at the moment.
> > >
> > > For 'bpf_ringbuf_{discard,submit,output}' a flag of '0' might send a
> > > notification to the process if needed.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>
> > > ---
> > >  include/uapi/linux/bpf.h       | 7 +++++++
> > >  tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 7 +++++++
> > >  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> > > index 49371eba98ba..8c5c7a893b87 100644
> > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> > > @@ -4061,12 +4061,15 @@ union bpf_attr {
> > >   *             of new data availability is sent.
> > >   *             If **BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP** is specified in *flags*, notification
> > >   *             of new data availability is sent unconditionally.
> > > + *             If **0** is specified in *flags*, notification
> > > + *             of new data availability is sent if needed.
> >
> > Maybe a trivial question, but what does "if needed" mean? Does that
> > mean "when the buffer is full"?
>
> I used to call it ns "adaptive notification", so maybe let's use that
> term instead of "if needed"? It means that in kernel BPF ringbuf code
> will check if the user-space consumer has caught up and consumed all
> the available data. In that case user-space might be waiting
> (sleeping) in epoll_wait() already and not processing samples
> actively. That means that we have to send notification, otherwise
> user-space might never wake up. But if the kernel sees that user-space
> is still processing previous record (consumer position < producer
> position), then we can bypass sending another notification, because
> user-space consumer protocol dictates that it needs to consume all the
> record until consumer position == producer position. So no
> notification is necessary for the newly submitted sample, as
> user-space will eventually see it without notification.
>
> Of course there is careful writes and memory ordering involved to make
> sure that we never miss notification.
>
> Does someone want to try to condense it into a succinct description? ;)

OK.

I can try to condense this and perhaps add it as code in the comment?