[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z69lzNYwBb-5CPvX@mini-arch>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 07:48:28 -0800
From: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>
To: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, dsahern@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev,
eddyz87@...il.com, song@...nel.org, yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...ichev.me,
haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, horms@...nel.org,
ncardwell@...gle.com, kuniyu@...zon.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] bpf: add TCP_BPF_RTO_MAX for bpf_setsockopt
On 02/14, Jason Xing wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2025 at 7:41 AM Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 02/13, Jason Xing wrote:
> > > Support bpf_setsockopt() to set the maximum value of RTO for
> > > BPF program.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
> > > ---
> > > Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst | 3 ++-
> > > include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 2 ++
> > > net/core/filter.c | 6 ++++++
> > > tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 2 ++
> > > 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst b/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst
> > > index 054561f8dcae..78eb0959438a 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst
> > > @@ -1241,7 +1241,8 @@ tcp_rto_min_us - INTEGER
> > >
> > > tcp_rto_max_ms - INTEGER
> > > Maximal TCP retransmission timeout (in ms).
> > > - Note that TCP_RTO_MAX_MS socket option has higher precedence.
> > > + Note that TCP_BPF_RTO_MAX and TCP_RTO_MAX_MS socket option have the
> > > + higher precedence for configuring this setting.
> >
> > The cover letter needs more explanation about the motivation. And
> > the precedence as well.
>
> I am targeting the net-next tree because of recent changes[1] made by
> Eric. It probably hasn't merged into the bpf-next tree.
>
> [1]: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net-next.git/commit/?id=ae9b3c0e79bc
>
> >
> > WRT precedence, can you install setsockopt cgroup program and filter out
> > calls to TCP_RTO_MAX_MS?
>
> Yesterday, as suggested by Kuniyuki, I decided to re-use the same
> logic of TCP_RTO_MAX_MS for bpf_setsockopt():
> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> index 2ec162dd83c4..ffec7b4357f9 100644
> --- a/net/core/filter.c
> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> @@ -5382,6 +5382,7 @@ static int sol_tcp_sockopt(struct sock *sk, int optname,
> case TCP_USER_TIMEOUT:
> case TCP_NOTSENT_LOWAT:
> case TCP_SAVE_SYN:
> + case TCP_RTO_MAX_MS:
> if (*optlen != sizeof(int))
> return -EINVAL;
> break;
>
> Are you referring to using the previous way (by introducing a new flag
> for BPF) because we need to know the explicit precedence between
> setsockopt() and bpf_setsockopt() or other reasons? If so, I think
> there are more places than setsockopt() to modify.
>
> And, sorry that I don't follow what you meant by saying "install
> setsockopt cgroup program" here. Please provide more hints.
Ah, sorry, I misread it as bpf options taking precedence over tcp ones;
ignore the suggestion about setsockopt cgroup prog.
And yes, reusing the logic of TCP_RTO_MAX_MS looks better!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists