On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:05 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2023/10/09 18:54, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 9, 2023 at 3:44 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2023/10/09 17:13, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 12:22 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> virtio-net have two usage of hashes: one is RSS and another is hash
> >>>> reporting. Conventionally the hash calculation was done by the VMM.
> >>>> However, computing the hash after the queue was chosen defeats the
> >>>> purpose of RSS.
> >>>>
> >>>> Another approach is to use eBPF steering program. This approach has
> >>>> another downside: it cannot report the calculated hash due to the
> >>>> restrictive nature of eBPF.
> >>>>
> >>>> Introduce the code to compute hashes to the kernel in order to overcome
> >>>> thse challenges. An alternative solution is to extend the eBPF steering
> >>>> program so that it will be able to report to the userspace, but it makes
> >>>> little sense to allow to implement different hashing algorithms with
> >>>> eBPF since the hash value reported by virtio-net is strictly defined by
> >>>> the specification.
> >>>>
> >>>> The hash value already stored in sk_buff is not used and computed
> >>>> independently since it may have been computed in a way not conformant
> >>>> with the specification.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>
> >>>> @@ -2116,31 +2172,49 @@ static ssize_t tun_put_user(struct tun_struct *tun,
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> if (vnet_hdr_sz) {
> >>>> - struct virtio_net_hdr gso;
> >>>> + union {
> >>>> + struct virtio_net_hdr hdr;
> >>>> + struct virtio_net_hdr_v1_hash v1_hash_hdr;
> >>>> + } hdr;
> >>>> + int ret;
> >>>>
> >>>> if (iov_iter_count(iter) < vnet_hdr_sz)
> >>>> return -EINVAL;
> >>>>
> >>>> - if (virtio_net_hdr_from_skb(skb, &gso,
> >>>> - tun_is_little_endian(tun), true,
> >>>> - vlan_hlen)) {
> >>>> + if ((READ_ONCE(tun->vnet_hash.flags) & TUN_VNET_HASH_REPORT) &&
> >>>> + vnet_hdr_sz >= sizeof(hdr.v1_hash_hdr) &&
> >>>> + skb->tun_vnet_hash) {
> >>>
> >>> Isn't vnet_hdr_sz guaranteed to be >= hdr.v1_hash_hdr, by virtue of
> >>> the set hash ioctl failing otherwise?
> >>>
> >>> Such checks should be limited to control path where possible
> >>
> >> There is a potential race since tun->vnet_hash.flags and vnet_hdr_sz are
> >> not read at once.
> >
> > It should not be possible to downgrade the hdr_sz once v1 is selected.
>
> I see nothing that prevents shrinking the header size.
>
> tun->vnet_hash.flags is read after vnet_hdr_sz so the race can happen
> even for the case the header size grows though this can be fixed by
> reordering the two reads.
One option is to fail any control path that tries to re-negotiate
header size once this hash option is enabled?
There is no practical reason to allow feature re-negotiation at any
arbitrary time.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
