Re: [PATCH bpf-next v7 1/8] bpf: Retire the struct_ops map kvalue->refcnt.

[Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 3/15/23 7:36 PM, Kui-Feng Lee wrote:
> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -1943,6 +1943,7 @@ struct bpf_map *bpf_map_get_with_uref(u32 ufd);
>   struct bpf_map *__bpf_map_get(struct fd f);
>   void bpf_map_inc(struct bpf_map *map);
>   void bpf_map_inc_with_uref(struct bpf_map *map);
> +struct bpf_map *__bpf_map_inc_not_zero(struct bpf_map *map, bool uref);
>   struct bpf_map * __must_check bpf_map_inc_not_zero(struct bpf_map *map);
>   void bpf_map_put_with_uref(struct bpf_map *map);
>   void bpf_map_put(struct bpf_map *map);
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
> index 38903fb52f98..2a854e9cee52 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
> @@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ struct bpf_struct_ops_map {
>   	struct bpf_struct_ops_value kvalue;
>   };
>   
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(update_mutex);

There has been a comment on the unused "update_mutex" since v3 and v5:

"...This is only used in patch 5 of this set. Please move it there..."


> +
>   #define VALUE_PREFIX "bpf_struct_ops_"
>   #define VALUE_PREFIX_LEN (sizeof(VALUE_PREFIX) - 1)
>   
> @@ -249,6 +251,7 @@ int bpf_struct_ops_map_sys_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
>   	struct bpf_struct_ops_map *st_map = (struct bpf_struct_ops_map *)map;
>   	struct bpf_struct_ops_value *uvalue, *kvalue;
>   	enum bpf_struct_ops_state state;
> +	s64 refcnt;
>   
>   	if (unlikely(*(u32 *)key != 0))
>   		return -ENOENT;
> @@ -267,7 +270,14 @@ int bpf_struct_ops_map_sys_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
>   	uvalue = value;
>   	memcpy(uvalue, st_map->uvalue, map->value_size);
>   	uvalue->state = state;
> -	refcount_set(&uvalue->refcnt, refcount_read(&kvalue->refcnt));
> +
> +	/* This value offers the user space a general estimate of how
> +	 * many sockets are still utilizing this struct_ops for TCP
> +	 * congestion control. The number might not be exact, but it
> +	 * should sufficiently meet our present goals.
> +	 */
> +	refcnt = atomic64_read(&map->refcnt) - atomic64_read(&map->usercnt);
> +	refcount_set(&uvalue->refcnt, max_t(s64, refcnt, 0));
>   
>   	return 0;
>   }
> @@ -491,7 +501,6 @@ static int bpf_struct_ops_map_update_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
>   		*(unsigned long *)(udata + moff) = prog->aux->id;
>   	}
>   
> -	refcount_set(&kvalue->refcnt, 1);
>   	bpf_map_inc(map);
>   
>   	set_memory_rox((long)st_map->image, 1);
> @@ -536,8 +545,7 @@ static int bpf_struct_ops_map_delete_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
>   	switch (prev_state) {
>   	case BPF_STRUCT_OPS_STATE_INUSE:
>   		st_map->st_ops->unreg(&st_map->kvalue.data);
> -		if (refcount_dec_and_test(&st_map->kvalue.refcnt))
> -			bpf_map_put(map);
> +		bpf_map_put(map);
>   		return 0;
>   	case BPF_STRUCT_OPS_STATE_TOBEFREE:
>   		return -EINPROGRESS;
> @@ -570,7 +578,7 @@ static void bpf_struct_ops_map_seq_show_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
>   	kfree(value);
>   }
>   
> -static void bpf_struct_ops_map_free(struct bpf_map *map)
> +static void bpf_struct_ops_map_free_nosync(struct bpf_map *map)

nit. __bpf_struct_ops_map_free() is the usual alternative name to use in this case.

>   {
>   	struct bpf_struct_ops_map *st_map = (struct bpf_struct_ops_map *)map;
>   
> @@ -582,6 +590,25 @@ static void bpf_struct_ops_map_free(struct bpf_map *map)
>   	bpf_map_area_free(st_map);
>   }
>   
> +static void bpf_struct_ops_map_free(struct bpf_map *map)
> +{
> +	/* The struct_ops's function may switch to another struct_ops.
> +	 *
> +	 * For example, bpf_tcp_cc_x->init() may switch to
> +	 * another tcp_cc_y by calling
> +	 * setsockopt(TCP_CONGESTION, "tcp_cc_y").
> +	 * During the switch,  bpf_struct_ops_put(tcp_cc_x) is called
> +	 * and its refcount may reach 0 which then free its
> +	 * trampoline image while tcp_cc_x is still running.
> +	 *
> +	 * Thus, a rcu grace period is needed here.
> +	 */
> +	synchronize_rcu();
> +	synchronize_rcu_tasks();

synchronize_rcu_mult(call_rcu, call_rcu_tasks) to wait both in parallel (credit 
to Paul's tip).