Message-ID: <32eb181f-f9fc-4a15-8715-984c09b13387@daynix.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 12:57:55 +0900
From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
 virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
 bpf@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
 daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, kafai@...com,
 songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
 kpsingh@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org, willemb@...gle.com,
 gustavoars@...nel.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
 steffen.klassert@...unet.com, nogikh@...gle.com, pablo@...filter.org,
 decui@...rosoft.com, jakub@...udflare.com, elver@...gle.com,
 pabeni@...hat.com, Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 5/7] tun: Introduce virtio-net hashing feature

On 2023/10/11 12:18, Jason Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 2:19 PM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2023/10/10 15:00, Jason Wang wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 1:51 PM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2023/10/10 14:45, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:52 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2023/10/09 19:44, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:12 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 2023/10/09 19:06, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:02 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 2023/10/09 18:57, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:57 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023/10/09 17:04, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 3:46 PM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023/10/09 5:08, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 10:04 PM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2023/10/09 4:07, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 7:22 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> virtio-net have two usage of hashes: one is RSS and another is hash
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reporting. Conventionally the hash calculation was done by the VMM.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> However, computing the hash after the queue was chosen defeats the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> purpose of RSS.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Another approach is to use eBPF steering program. This approach has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> another downside: it cannot report the calculated hash due to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> restrictive nature of eBPF.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Introduce the code to compute hashes to the kernel in order to overcome
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> thse challenges. An alternative solution is to extend the eBPF steering
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> program so that it will be able to report to the userspace, but it makes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> little sense to allow to implement different hashing algorithms with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eBPF since the hash value reported by virtio-net is strictly defined by
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the specification.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The hash value already stored in sk_buff is not used and computed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> independently since it may have been computed in a way not conformant
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the specification.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +static const struct tun_vnet_hash_cap tun_vnet_hash_cap = {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +       .max_indirection_table_length =
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               TUN_VNET_HASH_MAX_INDIRECTION_TABLE_LENGTH,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +       .types = VIRTIO_NET_SUPPORTED_HASH_TYPES
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +};
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No need to have explicit capabilities exchange like this? Tun either
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supports all or none.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tun does not support VIRTIO_NET_RSS_HASH_TYPE_IP_EX,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> VIRTIO_NET_RSS_HASH_TYPE_TCP_EX, and VIRTIO_NET_RSS_HASH_TYPE_UDP_EX.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is because the flow dissector does not support IPv6 extensions. The
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> specification is also vague, and does not tell how many TLVs should be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consumed at most when interpreting destination option header so I chose
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to avoid adding code for these hash types to the flow dissector. I doubt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyone will complain about it since nobody complains for Linux.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm also adding this so that we can extend it later.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> max_indirection_table_length may grow for systems with 128+ CPUs, or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> types may have other bits for new protocols in the future.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>                  case TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -               ret = tun_set_ebpf(tun, &tun->steering_prog, argp);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               bpf_ret = tun_set_ebpf(tun, &tun->steering_prog, argp);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               if (IS_ERR(bpf_ret))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       ret = PTR_ERR(bpf_ret);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               else if (bpf_ret)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       tun->vnet_hash.flags &= ~TUN_VNET_HASH_RSS;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't make one feature disable another.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF and TUNSETVNETHASH are mutually exclusive
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> functions. If one is enabled the other call should fail, with EBUSY
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for instance.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +       case TUNSETVNETHASH:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               len = sizeof(vnet_hash);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               if (copy_from_user(&vnet_hash, argp, len)) {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       ret = -EFAULT;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       break;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               if (((vnet_hash.flags & TUN_VNET_HASH_REPORT) &&
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                    (tun->vnet_hdr_sz < sizeof(struct virtio_net_hdr_v1_hash) ||
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                     !tun_is_little_endian(tun))) ||
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                    vnet_hash.indirection_table_mask >=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                    TUN_VNET_HASH_MAX_INDIRECTION_TABLE_LENGTH) {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       ret = -EINVAL;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       break;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               argp = (u8 __user *)argp + len;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               len = (vnet_hash.indirection_table_mask + 1) * 2;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               if (copy_from_user(vnet_hash_indirection_table, argp, len)) {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       ret = -EFAULT;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       break;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               argp = (u8 __user *)argp + len;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               len = virtio_net_hash_key_length(vnet_hash.types);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               if (copy_from_user(vnet_hash_key, argp, len)) {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       ret = -EFAULT;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +                       break;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +               }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably easier and less error-prone to define a fixed size control
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> struct with the max indirection table size.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I made its size variable because the indirection table and key may grow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the future as I wrote above.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Btw: please trim the CC: list considerably on future patches.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll do so in the next version with the TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF change you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To be clear: please don't just resubmit with that one change.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The skb and cb issues are quite fundamental issues that need to be resolved.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'd like to understand why adjusting the existing BPF feature for this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> exact purpose cannot be amended to return the key it produced.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> eBPF steering program is not designed for this particular problem in my
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding. It was introduced to derive hash values with an
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> understanding of application-specific semantics of packets instead of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generic IP/TCP/UDP semantics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This problem is rather different in terms that the hash derivation is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strictly defined by virtio-net. I don't think it makes sense to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> introduce the complexity of BPF when you always run the same code.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It can utilize the existing flow dissector and also make it easier to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use for the userspace by implementing this in the kernel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ok. There does appear to be overlap in functionality. But it might be
>>>>>>>>>>>>> easier to deploy to just have standard Toeplitz available without
>>>>>>>>>>>>> having to compile and load an eBPF program.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for the sk_buff and cb[] changes. The first is really not needed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> sk_buff simply would not scale if every edge case needs a few bits.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> An alternative is to move the bit to cb[] and clear it for every code
>>>>>>>>>>>> paths that lead to ndo_start_xmit(), but I'm worried that it is error-prone.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we can put the bit in sk_buff for now. We can implement the
>>>>>>>>>>>> alternative when we are short of bits.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I disagree. sk_buff fields add a cost to every code path. They cannot
>>>>>>>>>>> be added for every edge case.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It only takes an unused bit and does not grow the sk_buff size so I
>>>>>>>>>> think it has practically no cost for now.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The problem is that that thinking leads to death by a thousand cuts.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "for now" forces the cost of having to think hard how to avoid growing
>>>>>>>>> sk_buff onto the next person. Let's do it right from the start.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I see. I described an alternative to move the bit to cb[] and clear it
>>>>>>>> in all code paths that leads to ndo_start_xmit() earlier. Does that
>>>>>>>> sound good to you?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you use the control block to pass information between
>>>>>>> __dev_queue_xmit on the tun device and tun_net_xmit, using gso_skb_cb,
>>>>>>> the field can be left undefined in all non-tun paths. tun_select_queue
>>>>>>> can initialize.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The problem is that tun_select_queue() is not always called.
>>>>>> netdev_core_pick_tx() ensures dev->real_num_tx_queues != 1 before
>>>>>> calling it, but this variable may change later and result in a race
>>>>>> condition. Another case is that XDP with predefined queue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I would still use skb->hash to encode the hash. That hash type of that
>>>>>>> field is not strictly defined. It can be siphash from ___skb_get_hash
>>>>>>> or a device hash, which most likely also uses Toeplitz. Then you also
>>>>>>> don't run into the problem of growing the struct size.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm concerned exactly because it's not strictly defined. Someone may
>>>>>> decide to overwrite it later if we are not cautious enough. qdisc_skb_cb
>>>>>> also has sufficient space to contain both of the hash value and type.
>>>>>
>>>>> How about using skb extensions?
>>>>
>>>> I think it will work. I'll try it in the next version.
>>>
>>> Btw, I still think using eBPF for hash might be better.
>>>
>>> Though the hashing rule is defined in the spec, it may be extended in
>>> the future. For example, several extensions has been proposed:
>>>
>>> 1) RSS context
>>> 2) encapsulated packet hashing
>>
>> Looking at the proposals, I'm now more inclined to extend the BPF
>> steering program.
> 
> Just to make sure we are at the same page.
> 
> If the eBPF program needs to access skb extensions, it would not be a
> steering program anymore (not a filter).
> 
> Or do you mean it is a dedicated eBPF program that calculates the hash?

I think the BPF program should be a steering program but extended for 
hash reporting.

Since we need a hash reporting feature that is not present in a socket 
filter, the BPF program should have a dedicated bpf_prog_type (not 
BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER). However, as its functionality is the 
superset of the conventional steering program, I'm planning to use the 
existing TUNSETSTEERINGEBPF ioctl to set it.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists