On Fri, 9 Oct 2020 11:33:33 -0700
Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > This change makes it possible to identify SKBs that have been redirected
> > > by TC-BPF (cls_act). This is needed for a number of cases.
> > >
> > > (1) For collaborating with driver ifb net_devices.
> > > (2) For avoiding starting generic-XDP prog on TC ingress redirect.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Not sure if anyone actually cares about ifb devices, but my worry is that the
> > generic XDP vs tc interaction has been as-is for quite some time so this change
> > in behavior could break in the wild.
No, I believe this happened as recent at kernel v5.2, when Stephen
Hemminger changed this in commit 458bf2f224f0 ("net: core: support XDP
generic on stacked devices."). And for the record I think that
patch/change was a mistake, as people should not use generic-XDP for
these kind of stacked devices (they should really use TC-BPF as that is
the right tool for the job).
> I'm not at all sure of the interactions/implications here.
> But I do have a request to enable ifb on Android for ingress rate
> limiting and separately we're trying to make XDP work...
> So we might at some point end up with cellular interfaces with xdp
> ebpf (redirect for forwarding/nat/tethering) + ifb + tc ebpf (for
> device local stuff).
To me I was very surprised when I discovered tc-redirect didn't work
with ifb driver. And it sounds like you have an actual use-case for
this on Android.
> But this is still all very vague and 'ideas only' level.
> (and in general I think I'd like to get rid of the redirect in tc
> ebpf, and leave only xlat64 translation for to-the-device traffic in
> there, so maybe there's no problem anyway??)
I know it sounds strange coming from me "Mr.XDP", but I actaully think
that in many cases you will be better off with using TC-BPF.
Especially on Android, as it will be very hard to get native-XDP
implemented in all these different drivers. (And you don't want to use
generic-XDP, because there is a high chance it causes a reallocation of
the SKB, which is a huge performance hit).
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
