Hi,
On 11/11/2023 9:39 AM, Yonghong Song wrote:
> Kirill Shutemov reported significant percpu memory consumption increase after
> booting in 288-cpu VM ([1]) due to commit 41a5db8d8161 ("bpf: Add support for
> non-fix-size percpu mem allocation"). The percpu memory consumption is
> increased from 111MB to 969MB. The number is from /proc/meminfo.
>
> I tried to reproduce the issue with my local VM which at most supports upto
> 255 cpus. With 252 cpus, without the above commit, the percpu memory
> consumption immediately after boot is 57MB while with the above commit the
> percpu memory consumption is 231MB.
>
> This is not good since so far percpu memory from bpf memory allocator is not
> widely used yet. Let us change pre-allocation in init stage to on-demand
> allocation when verifier detects there is a need of percpu memory for bpf
> program. With this change, percpu memory consumption after boot can be reduced
> signicantly.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231109154934.4saimljtqx625l3v@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
> Fixes: 41a5db8d8161 ("bpf: Add support for non-fix-size percpu mem allocation")
> Reported-and-tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/bpf.h | 2 +-
> kernel/bpf/core.c | 8 +++-----
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++--
> 3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> Changelog:
> v2 -> v3:
> - Use dedicated mutex lock (bpf_percpu_ma_lock)
> v1 -> v2:
> - Add proper Reported-and-tested-by tag.
> - Do a check of !bpf_global_percpu_ma_set before acquiring verifier_lock.
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> index 35bff17396c0..6762dac3ef76 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ extern struct idr btf_idr;
> extern spinlock_t btf_idr_lock;
> extern struct kobject *btf_kobj;
> extern struct bpf_mem_alloc bpf_global_ma, bpf_global_percpu_ma;
> -extern bool bpf_global_ma_set, bpf_global_percpu_ma_set;
> +extern bool bpf_global_ma_set;
>
> typedef u64 (*bpf_callback_t)(u64, u64, u64, u64, u64);
> typedef int (*bpf_iter_init_seq_priv_t)(void *private_data,
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> index 08626b519ce2..cd3afe57ece3 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> @@ -64,8 +64,8 @@
> #define OFF insn->off
> #define IMM insn->imm
>
> -struct bpf_mem_alloc bpf_global_ma, bpf_global_percpu_ma;
> -bool bpf_global_ma_set, bpf_global_percpu_ma_set;
> +struct bpf_mem_alloc bpf_global_ma;
> +bool bpf_global_ma_set;
>
> /* No hurry in this branch
> *
> @@ -2934,9 +2934,7 @@ static int __init bpf_global_ma_init(void)
>
> ret = bpf_mem_alloc_init(&bpf_global_ma, 0, false);
> bpf_global_ma_set = !ret;
> - ret = bpf_mem_alloc_init(&bpf_global_percpu_ma, 0, true);
> - bpf_global_percpu_ma_set = !ret;
> - return !bpf_global_ma_set || !bpf_global_percpu_ma_set;
> + return ret;
> }
> late_initcall(bpf_global_ma_init);
> #endif
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index a2267d5ed14e..6da370a047fe 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
> #include <linux/poison.h>
> #include <linux/module.h>
> #include <linux/cpumask.h>
> +#include <linux/bpf_mem_alloc.h>
> #include <net/xdp.h>
>
> #include "disasm.h"
> @@ -41,6 +42,9 @@ static const struct bpf_verifier_ops * const bpf_verifier_ops[] = {
> #undef BPF_LINK_TYPE
> };
>
> +struct bpf_mem_alloc bpf_global_percpu_ma;
> +static bool bpf_global_percpu_ma_set;
> +
> /* bpf_check() is a static code analyzer that walks eBPF program
> * instruction by instruction and updates register/stack state.
> * All paths of conditional branches are analyzed until 'bpf_exit' insn.
> @@ -336,6 +340,7 @@ struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta {
> struct btf *btf_vmlinux;
>
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(bpf_verifier_lock);
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(bpf_percpu_ma_lock);
>
> static const struct bpf_line_info *
> find_linfo(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 insn_off)
> @@ -12091,8 +12096,19 @@ static int check_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
> if (meta.func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_obj_new_impl] && !bpf_global_ma_set)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> - if (meta.func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_percpu_obj_new_impl] && !bpf_global_percpu_ma_set)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + if (meta.func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_percpu_obj_new_impl]) {
> + if (!bpf_global_percpu_ma_set) {
> + mutex_lock(&bpf_percpu_ma_lock);
> + if (!bpf_global_percpu_ma_set) {
> + err = bpf_mem_alloc_init(&bpf_global_percpu_ma, 0, true);
> + if (!err)
> + bpf_global_percpu_ma_set = true;
> + }
A dumb question here: do we need some memory barrier to guarantee the
memory order between bpf_global_percpu_ma_set and bpf_global_percpu_ma ?
> + mutex_unlock(&bpf_percpu_ma_lock);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> + }
> + }
>
> if (((u64)(u32)meta.arg_constant.value) != meta.arg_constant.value) {
> verbose(env, "local type ID argument must be in range [0, U32_MAX]\n");
