netdev - Re: [BPF PATCH for-next] cgroup/bpf: fast path for not loaded skb BPF filtering

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: <20211211003838.7u4lcqghcq2gqvho@kafai-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Dec 2021 16:38:38 -0800
From:   Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
To:     Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BPF PATCH for-next] cgroup/bpf: fast path for not loaded skb
 BPF filtering

On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 02:23:34AM +0000, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> cgroup_bpf_enabled_key static key guards from overhead in cases where
> no cgroup bpf program of a specific type is loaded in any cgroup. Turn
> out that's not always good enough, e.g. when there are many cgroups but
> ones that we're interesting in are without bpf. It's seen in server
> environments, but the problem seems to be even wider as apparently
> systemd loads some BPF affecting my laptop.
> 
> Profiles for small packet or zerocopy transmissions over fast network
> show __cgroup_bpf_run_filter_skb() taking 2-3%, 1% of which is from
> migrate_disable/enable(), and similarly on the receiving side. Also
> got +4-5% of t-put for local testing.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
>  kernel/bpf/cgroup.c        | 23 +++++++----------------
>  2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h b/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h
> index 11820a430d6c..99b01201d7db 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h
> @@ -141,6 +141,9 @@ struct cgroup_bpf {
>  	struct list_head progs[MAX_CGROUP_BPF_ATTACH_TYPE];
>  	u32 flags[MAX_CGROUP_BPF_ATTACH_TYPE];
>  
> +	/* for each type tracks whether effective prog array is not empty */
> +	unsigned long enabled_mask;
> +
>  	/* list of cgroup shared storages */
>  	struct list_head storages;
>  
> @@ -219,11 +222,25 @@ int bpf_percpu_cgroup_storage_copy(struct bpf_map *map, void *key, void *value);
>  int bpf_percpu_cgroup_storage_update(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
>  				     void *value, u64 flags);
>  
> +static inline bool __cgroup_bpf_type_enabled(struct cgroup_bpf *cgrp_bpf,
> +					     enum cgroup_bpf_attach_type atype)
> +{
> +	return test_bit(atype, &cgrp_bpf->enabled_mask);
> +}
> +
> +#define CGROUP_BPF_TYPE_ENABLED(sk, atype)				       \
> +({									       \
> +	struct cgroup *__cgrp = sock_cgroup_ptr(&(sk)->sk_cgrp_data);	       \
> +									       \
> +	__cgroup_bpf_type_enabled(&__cgrp->bpf, (atype));		       \
> +})
I think it should directly test if the array is empty or not instead of
adding another bit.

Can the existing __cgroup_bpf_prog_array_is_empty(cgrp, ...) test be used instead?