On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 11:22:19AM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 05:17:11PM -0700, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> >> > static void bq_xmit_all(struct xdp_dev_bulk_queue *bq, u32 flags)
> >> > {
> >> > struct net_device *dev = bq->dev;
> >> > - int sent = 0, err = 0;
> >> > + int sent = 0, drops = 0, err = 0;
> >> > + unsigned int cnt = bq->count;
> >> > + int to_send = cnt;
> >> > int i;
> >> >
> >> > - if (unlikely(!bq->count))
> >> > + if (unlikely(!cnt))
> >> > return;
> >> >
> >> > - for (i = 0; i < bq->count; i++) {
> >> > + for (i = 0; i < cnt; i++) {
> >> > struct xdp_frame *xdpf = bq->q[i];
> >> >
> >> > prefetch(xdpf);
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > - sent = dev->netdev_ops->ndo_xdp_xmit(dev, bq->count, bq->q, flags);
> >> > + if (bq->xdp_prog) {
> >> bq->xdp_prog is used here
> >>
> >> > + to_send = dev_map_bpf_prog_run(bq->xdp_prog, bq->q, cnt, dev);
> >> > + if (!to_send)
> >> > + goto out;
> >> > +
> >> > + drops = cnt - to_send;
> >> > + }
> >> > +
> >>
> >> [ ... ]
> >>
> >> > static void bq_enqueue(struct net_device *dev, struct xdp_frame *xdpf,
> >> > - struct net_device *dev_rx)
> >> > + struct net_device *dev_rx, struct bpf_prog *xdp_prog)
> >> > {
> >> > struct list_head *flush_list = this_cpu_ptr(&dev_flush_list);
> >> > struct xdp_dev_bulk_queue *bq = this_cpu_ptr(dev->xdp_bulkq);
> >> > @@ -412,18 +466,22 @@ static void bq_enqueue(struct net_device *dev, struct xdp_frame *xdpf,
> >> > /* Ingress dev_rx will be the same for all xdp_frame's in
> >> > * bulk_queue, because bq stored per-CPU and must be flushed
> >> > * from net_device drivers NAPI func end.
> >> > + *
> >> > + * Do the same with xdp_prog and flush_list since these fields
> >> > + * are only ever modified together.
> >> > */
> >> > - if (!bq->dev_rx)
> >> > + if (!bq->dev_rx) {
> >> > bq->dev_rx = dev_rx;
> >> > + bq->xdp_prog = xdp_prog;
> >> bp->xdp_prog is assigned here and could be used later in bq_xmit_all().
> >> How is bq->xdp_prog protected? Are they all under one rcu_read_lock()?
> >> It is not very obvious after taking a quick look at xdp_do_flush[_map].
> >>
> >> e.g. what if the devmap elem gets deleted.
> >
> > Jesper knows better than me. From my veiw, based on the description of
> > __dev_flush():
> >
> > On devmap tear down we ensure the flush list is empty before completing to
> > ensure all flush operations have completed. When drivers update the bpf
> > program they may need to ensure any flush ops are also complete.
AFAICT, the bq->xdp_prog is not from the dev. It is from a devmap's elem.
>
> Yeah, drivers call xdp_do_flush() before exiting their NAPI poll loop,
> which also runs under one big rcu_read_lock(). So the storage in the
> bulk queue is quite temporary, it's just used for bulking to increase
> performance :)
I am missing the one big rcu_read_lock() part. For example, in i40e_txrx.c,
i40e_run_xdp() has its own rcu_read_lock/unlock(). dst->xdp_prog used to run
in i40e_run_xdp() and it is fine.
In this patch, dst->xdp_prog is run outside of i40e_run_xdp() where the
rcu_read_unlock() has already done. It is now run in xdp_do_flush_map().
or I missed the big rcu_read_lock() in i40e_napi_poll()?
I do see the big rcu_read_lock() in mlx5e_napi_poll().
