[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZB9UdB5pgOAacioS@pop-os.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2023 13:07:16 -0700
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next v3] sock_map: dump socket map id via diag
On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 11:13:03AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 12:19 PM Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>
> >
> > Currently there is no way to know which sockmap a socket has been added
> > to from outside, especially for that a socket can be added to multiple
> > sockmap's. We could dump this via socket diag, as shown below.
> >
> > Sample output:
> >
> > # ./iproute2/misc/ss -tnaie --bpf-map
> > ESTAB 0 344329 127.0.0.1:1234 127.0.0.1:40912 ino:21098 sk:5 cgroup:/user.slice/user-0.slice/session-c1.scope <-> sockmap: 1
> >
> > # bpftool map
> > 1: sockmap flags 0x0
> > key 4B value 4B max_entries 2 memlock 4096B
> > pids echo-sockmap(549)
> > 4: array name pid_iter.rodata flags 0x480
> > key 4B value 4B max_entries 1 memlock 4096B
> > btf_id 10 frozen
> > pids bpftool(624)
> >
> > In the future, we could dump other sockmap related stats too, hence I
> > make it a nested attribute.
> >
> > Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
> > Cc: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>
>
> Looks fine from my POW, will let others comment.
>
> One thing I still don't understand here: what is missing from the
> socket iterators to implement this? Is it all the sk_psock_get magic?
> I remember you dismissed Yonghong's suggestion on v1, but have you
> actually tried it?
I am very confused. So in order to figure out which sockmap a socket has
been added to, I have to dump *all* sockmap's??? It seems you are
suggesting to solve this with a more complex and unnecessary approach?
Please tell me why, I am really lost, I don't even see there is a point
to make here.
>
> Also: a test would be nice to have. I know you've tested it with the
> iproute2, but having something regularly exercised by the ci seems
> good to have (and not a ton of work).
Sure, so where are the tests for socket diag? I don't see any within the
tree:
$ git grep INET_DIAG_SOCKOPT -- tools/
$
Note, this is not suitable for bpf selftests, because it is less relevant
to bpf, much more relevant to socket diag. I thought this is obvious.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists