On 7/5/21 8:11 PM, G wrote:
Hi BPF Experts
I'm having an issue with using "bpf_map_update_elem" and "bpf_map_get_next_key" at the same time when looping through the bpf HashMap.
My program turns to an infinite loop and the pseudocode is as following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bpf.MapCreate // type=BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH size=128
for { bpf.MapUpdate } // add(update) 128 elements at once
then loop through the map to update each element
bpf.MapGetNextKey(fd, nil, &scankey) // find first key
for {
bpf.MapUpate(fd, &scankey, &val, BPF_EXIST)
bpf.MapGetNextKey(fd, &scankey, &scankey)
}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have tried to read the relevant kernel code, and seems like it is moving the element to the top of the has bucket when calling the “bpf_map_update_elem” even the element already exists in the hash map. See the following source code:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
// kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
htab_map_update_elem {
...
/* add new element to the head of the list, so that
* concurrent search will find it before old elem
*/
hlist_nulls_add_head_rcu(&l_new->hash_node, head);
...
}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, when I was trying to traversing the two elements in the same hash a bucket, it ran into an infinite loop by repeatedly getting the key of these two elements. Not sure my understanding for "bpf_map_update_elem"and "bpf_map_get_next_key" is correct or not. My question is: is that behave as the design? or is it a bug for the bpf hashmap? Please let me know, thanks.
bpf_map_get_next_key() is added after bpf_map_update_elem(). So the
above behavior is in the kernel already for sometimes.
bpf_map_get_next_key() is not super reliable for hash table as if some
deletion happens, the get_next_key may start from the beginning.
The recommendation is to use bpf_map_*_batch() interface.
If your kernel does not implement bpf_map_*_batch() interface, I think
it would be best you call bpf_map_get_next_key() for ALL elements before
doing any update/delete.
Best regards
W.Gao
