netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] xsk: add test for tx

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, 14 Dec 2021 15:27:58 +0100
From:   Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>
To:     Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>
Cc:     magnus.karlsson@...el.com, bjorn@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
        daniel@...earbox.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        jonathan.lemon@...il.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] xsk: add test for tx_writeable to batched path

On Tue, Dec 14, 2021 at 11:26:47AM +0100, Magnus Karlsson wrote:
> From: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>
> 
> Add a test for the tx_writeable condition to the batched Tx processing
> path. This test is in the skb and non-batched code paths but not in the
> batched code path. So add it there. This test makes sure that a
> process is not woken up until there are a sufficiently large number of
> free entries in the Tx ring. Currently, any driver using the batched
> interface will be woken up even if there is only one free entry,
> impacting performance negatively.

I gave this patch a shot on ice driver with the Tx batching patch that i'm
about to send which is using the xsk_tx_peek_release_desc_batch(). I ran
the 2 core setup with no busy poll and it turned out that this change has
a negative impact on performance - it degrades by 5%.

After a short chat with Magnus he said it's due to the touch to the global
state of a ring that xsk_tx_writeable() is doing.

So maintainers, please do not apply this yet, we'll come up with a
solution.

Also, should this be sent to bpf tree (not bpf-next) ?

Thanks!

> 
> Fixes: 3413f04141aa ("xsk: Change the tx writeable condition")
> Signed-off-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>
> ---
>  net/xdp/xsk.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/xdp/xsk.c b/net/xdp/xsk.c
> index 28ef3f4465ae..3772fcaa76ed 100644
> --- a/net/xdp/xsk.c
> +++ b/net/xdp/xsk.c
> @@ -392,7 +392,8 @@ u32 xsk_tx_peek_release_desc_batch(struct xsk_buff_pool *pool, struct xdp_desc *
>  
>  	xskq_cons_release_n(xs->tx, nb_pkts);
>  	__xskq_cons_release(xs->tx);
> -	xs->sk.sk_write_space(&xs->sk);
> +	if (xsk_tx_writeable(xs))
> +		xs->sk.sk_write_space(&xs->sk);
>  
>  out:
>  	rcu_read_unlock();
> 
> base-commit: d27a662290963a1cde26cdfdbac71a546c06e94a
> -- 
> 2.29.0
>