netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Optimize IPv6 path in ip_neigh_for

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: <759f82f0-0498-466c-a4c2-a87a86e06315@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 12:51:05 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 rmikey@...a.com, kernel-team@...a.com, horms@...nel.org,
 "open list:NETWORKING [IPv4/IPv6]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Optimize IPv6 path in ip_neigh_for_gw()

On 10/4/24 19:37, Breno Leitao wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 11:01:29AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 10/4/24 10:27 AM, Breno Leitao wrote:
>>> Branch annotation traces from approximately 200 IPv6-enabled hosts
>>> revealed that the 'likely' branch in ip_neigh_for_gw() was consistently
>>> mispredicted. Given the increasing prevalence of IPv6 in modern networks,
>>> this commit adjusts the function to favor the IPv6 path.
>>>
>>> Swap the order of the conditional statements and move the 'likely'
>>> annotation to the IPv6 case. This change aims to improve performance in
>>> IPv6-dominant environments by reducing branch mispredictions.
>>>
>>> This optimization aligns with the trend of IPv6 becoming the default IP
>>> version in many deployments, and should benefit modern network
>>> configurations.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
>>> ---
>>>   include/net/route.h | 6 +++---
>>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/net/route.h b/include/net/route.h
>>> index 1789f1e6640b..b90b7b1effb8 100644
>>> --- a/include/net/route.h
>>> +++ b/include/net/route.h
>>> @@ -389,11 +389,11 @@ static inline struct neighbour *ip_neigh_for_gw(struct rtable *rt,
>>>   	struct net_device *dev = rt->dst.dev;
>>>   	struct neighbour *neigh;
>>>   
>>> -	if (likely(rt->rt_gw_family == AF_INET)) {
>>> -		neigh = ip_neigh_gw4(dev, rt->rt_gw4);
>>> -	} else if (rt->rt_gw_family == AF_INET6) {
>>> +	if (likely(rt->rt_gw_family == AF_INET6)) {
>>>   		neigh = ip_neigh_gw6(dev, &rt->rt_gw6);
>>>   		*is_v6gw = true;
>>> +	} else if (rt->rt_gw_family == AF_INET) {
>>> +		neigh = ip_neigh_gw4(dev, rt->rt_gw4);
>>>   	} else {
>>>   		neigh = ip_neigh_gw4(dev, ip_hdr(skb)->daddr);
>>>   	}
>>
>> This is an IPv4 function allowing support for IPv6 addresses as a
>> nexthop. It is appropriate for IPv4 family checks to be first.
> 
> Right. In which case is this called on IPv6 only systems?
> 
> On my IPv6-only 200 systems, the annotated branch predictor is showing
> it is mispredicted 100% of the time.

perf probe -a ip_neigh_for_gw; perf record -e probe:ip_neigh_for_gw -ag; 
perf script

should give you an hint.

Cheers,

Paolo