netdev - Re: [PATCH v9 bpf-next 02/14] xdp: introduce flags field in xdp_buff/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:   Tue, 6 Jul 2021 19:47:30 +0200
From:   Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com>
To:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc:     Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, shayagr@...zon.com,
        "Jubran, Samih" <sameehj@...zon.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Eelco Chaudron <echaudro@...hat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>,
        Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>,
        "Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
        Tirthendu <tirthendu.sarkar@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 bpf-next 02/14] xdp: introduce flags field in
 xdp_buff/xdp_frame

> On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 4:53 AM Lorenzo Bianconi
> <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 8:52 AM Lorenzo Bianconi
> > > <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 5:43 AM Lorenzo Bianconi
> > > > > <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > >
> > > Hi Lorenzo,
> > >
> > > What about doing something like breaking up the type value in
> > > xdp_mem_info? The fact is having it as an enum doesn't get us much
> > > since we have a 32b type field but are only storing 4 possible values
> > > there currently
> > >
> > > The way I see it, scatter-gather is just another memory model
> > > attribute rather than being something entirely new. It makes as much
> > > sense to have a bit there for MEM_TYPE_PAGE_SG as it does for
> > > MEM_TYPE_PAGE_SHARED. I would consider either splitting the type field
> > > into two 16b fields. For example you might have one field that
> > > describes the source pool which is currently either allocated page
> > > (ORDER0, SHARED), page_pool (PAGE_POOL), or XSK pool (XSK_BUFF_POOL),
> > > and then two flags for type with there being either shared and/or
> > > scatter-gather.
> >
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > I am fine reducing the xdp_mem_info size defining type field as u16 instead of
> > u32 but I think mb is a per-xdp_buff/xdp_frame property since at runtime we can
> > receive a tiny single page xdp_buff/xdp_frame and a "jumbo" xdp_buff/xdp_frame
> > composed by multiple pages. According to the documentation available in
> > include/net/xdp.h, xdp_rxq_info (where xdp_mem_info is contained for xdp_buff)
> > is "associated with the driver level RX-ring queues and it is information that
> > is specific to how the driver have configured a given RX-ring queue" so I guess
> > it is a little bit counterintuitive to add this info there.
> 
> It isn't really all that counterintuitive. However it does put the
> onus on the driver to be consistent about things. So even a
> single-buffer xdp_buff would technically have to be a scatter-gather
> buff, but it would have no fragments in it. So the requirement would
> be to initialize the frags and data_len fields to 0 for all xdp_buff
> structures.

nr_frags and data_len are currently defined in skb_shared_info(xdp_buff)
so I guess initialize them to 0 will trigger a cache miss (in fact we
introduced the mb bit just to avoid this initialization and introduce
penalties for legacy single-buffer use-case). Do you mean to have these
fields in xdp_buff/xdp_frame structure?

> 
> > Moreover we have the "issue" for devmap in dev_map_bpf_prog_run() when we
> > perform XDP_REDIRECT with the approach you proposed and last we can reuse this
> > new flags filed for XDP hw-hints support.
> > What about reducing xdp_mem_info and add the flags field in xdp_buff/xdp_frame
> > in order to avoid increasing the xdp_buff/xdp_frame size? Am I missing
> > something?
> 
> The problem is there isn't a mem_info field in the xdp_buff. It is in
> the Rx queue info structure.

yes, this is what I meant :)

Regards,
Lorenzo

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - Alex
> 

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)