[...]
> > * using a single memcpy() in __copy_skb_header()
> > */
> > @@ -3088,7 +3095,13 @@ static inline void skb_frag_ref(struct sk_buff *skb, int f)
> > */
> > static inline void __skb_frag_unref(skb_frag_t *frag, bool recycle)
>
> Does it make sure to define a new function like recyclable_skb_frag_unref()
> instead of adding the recycle parameter? This way we may avoid checking
> skb->pp_recycle for head data and every frag?
>
We'd still have to check when to run __skb_frag_unref or
recyclable_skb_frag_unref so I am not sure we can avoid that.
In any case I'll have a look
> > {
> > - put_page(skb_frag_page(frag));
> > + struct page *page = skb_frag_page(frag);
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL
> > + if (recycle && page_pool_return_skb_page(page_address(page)))
> > + return;
> > +#endif
> > + put_page(page);
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > @@ -3100,7 +3113,7 @@ static inline void __skb_frag_unref(skb_frag_t *frag, bool recycle)
> > */
> > static inline void skb_frag_unref(struct sk_buff *skb, int f)
> > {
> > - __skb_frag_unref(&skb_shinfo(skb)->frags[f], false);
> > + __skb_frag_unref(&skb_shinfo(skb)->frags[f], skb->pp_recycle);
> > }
> >
> > /**
> > @@ -4699,5 +4712,14 @@ static inline u64 skb_get_kcov_handle(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > #endif
> > }
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL
> > +static inline void skb_mark_for_recycle(struct sk_buff *skb, struct page *page,
> > + struct page_pool *pp)
> > +{
> > + skb->pp_recycle = 1;
> > + page_pool_store_mem_info(page, pp);
> > +}
> > +#endif
> > +
> > #endif /* __KERNEL__ */
> > #endif /* _LINUX_SKBUFF_H */
> > diff --git a/include/net/page_pool.h b/include/net/page_pool.h
> > index 24b3d42c62c0..ce75abeddb29 100644
> > --- a/include/net/page_pool.h
> > +++ b/include/net/page_pool.h
> > @@ -148,6 +148,8 @@ inline enum dma_data_direction page_pool_get_dma_dir(struct page_pool *pool)
> > return pool->p.dma_dir;
> > }
> >
> > +bool page_pool_return_skb_page(void *data);
> > +
> > struct page_pool *page_pool_create(const struct page_pool_params *params);
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL
> > @@ -253,4 +255,11 @@ static inline void page_pool_ring_unlock(struct page_pool *pool)
> > spin_unlock_bh(&pool->ring.producer_lock);
> > }
> >
> > +/* Store mem_info on struct page and use it while recycling skb frags */
> > +static inline
> > +void page_pool_store_mem_info(struct page *page, struct page_pool *pp)
> > +{
> > + page->pp = pp;
> > +}
> > +
> > #endif /* _NET_PAGE_POOL_H */
> > diff --git a/net/core/page_pool.c b/net/core/page_pool.c
> > index 9de5d8c08c17..fa9f17db7c48 100644
> > --- a/net/core/page_pool.c
> > +++ b/net/core/page_pool.c
> > @@ -626,3 +626,26 @@ void page_pool_update_nid(struct page_pool *pool, int new_nid)
> > }
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_update_nid);
> > +
> > +bool page_pool_return_skb_page(void *data)
> > +{
> > + struct page_pool *pp;
> > + struct page *page;
> > +
> > + page = virt_to_head_page(data);
> > + if (unlikely(page->pp_magic != PP_SIGNATURE))
>
> we have checked the skb->pp_recycle before checking the page->pp_magic,
> so the above seems like a likely() instead of unlikely()?
>
The check here is ! = PP_SIGNATURE. So since we already checked for
pp_recycle, it's unlikely the signature won't match.
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + pp = (struct page_pool *)page->pp;
> > +
> > + /* Driver set this to memory recycling info. Reset it on recycle.
> > + * This will *not* work for NIC using a split-page memory model.
> > + * The page will be returned to the pool here regardless of the
> > + * 'flipped' fragment being in use or not.
> > + */
> > + page->pp = NULL;
>
> Why not only clear the page->pp when the page can not be recycled
> by the page pool? so that we do not need to set and clear it every
> time the page is recycled。
>
If the page cannot be recycled, page->pp will not probably be set to begin
with. Since we don't embed the feature in page_pool and we require the
driver to explicitly enable it, as part of the 'skb flow', I'd rather keep
it as is. When we set/clear the page->pp, the page is probably already in
cache, so I doubt this will have any measurable impact.
> > + page_pool_put_full_page(pp, virt_to_head_page(data), false);
> > +
> > C(end);
[...]
> > @@ -1725,6 +1734,7 @@ int pskb_expand_head(struct sk_buff *skb, int nhead, int ntail,
> > skb->cloned = 0;
> > skb->hdr_len = 0;
> > skb->nohdr = 0;
> > + skb->pp_recycle = 0;
>
> I am not sure why we clear the skb->pp_recycle here.
> As my understanding, the pskb_expand_head() only allocate new head
> data, the old frag page in skb_shinfo()->frags still could be from
> page pool， right?
>
Ah correct! In that case we must not clear skb->pp_recycle. The new head
will fail on the signature check and end up being freed, while the
remaining frags will be recycled. The *original* head will be
unmapped/recycled (based of the page refcnt) on the pskb_expand_head()
itself.
> > atomic_set(&skb_shinfo(skb)->dataref, 1);
> >
> > skb_metadata_clear(skb);
> > @@ -3495,7 +3505,7 @@ int skb_shift(struct sk_buff *tgt, struct sk_buff *skb, int shiftlen)
> > fragto = &skb_shinfo(tgt)->frags[merge];
> >
> > skb_frag_size_add(fragto, skb_frag_size(fragfrom));
> > - __skb_frag_unref(fragfrom, false);
> > + __skb_frag_unref(fragfrom, skb->pp_recycle);
> > }
> >
> > /* Reposition in the original skb */
> > @@ -5285,6 +5295,13 @@ bool skb_try_coalesce(struct sk_buff *to, struct sk_buff *from,
> > if (skb_cloned(to))
> > return false;
> >
> > + /* We can't coalesce skb that are allocated from slab and page_pool
> > + * The recycle mark is on the skb, so that might end up trying to
> > + * recycle slab allocated skb->head
> > + */
> > + if (to->pp_recycle != from->pp_recycle)
> > + return false;
>
> Since we are also depending on page->pp_magic to decide whether to
> recycle a page, we could just set the to->pp_recycle according to
> from->pp_recycle and do the coalesce?
So I was think about this myself. This check is a 'leftover' from my
initial version, were I only had the pp_recycle bit + struct page
meta-data (without the signature). Since that version didn't have the
signature you could not coalesce 2 skb's coming from page_pool/slab.
We could now do what you suggest, but honestly I can't think of many use
cases that this can happen to begin with. I think I'd prefer leaving it as
is and adjusting the comment. If we can somehow prove this happens
oftenly and has a performance impact, we can go ahead and remove it.
[...]
Thanks
/Ilias
