From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: kuba@kernel.org, passt-dev@passt.top, sbrivio@redhat.com,
lvivier@redhat.com, dgibson@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tcp: add support for SO_PEEK_OFF
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 10:14:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9cb12376da3f6cd316320b29f294cc84eaba6cfa.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <89f263be-3403-8404-69ed-313539d59669@redhat.com>
On Thu, 2024-02-15 at 17:24 -0500, Jon Maloy wrote:
>
> On 2024-02-15 12:46, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 15, 2024 at 6:41 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > Note: please send text-only email to netdev.
> > >
> > > On Thu, 2024-02-15 at 10:11 -0500, Jon Maloy wrote:
> > > > I wonder if the following could be acceptable:
> > > >
> > > > if (flags & MSG_PEEK)
> > > > sk_peek_offset_fwd(sk, used);
> > > > else if (peek_offset > 0)
> > > > sk_peek_offset_bwd(sk, used);
> > > >
> > > > peek_offset is already present in the data cache, and if it has the value
> > > > zero it means either that that sk->sk_peek_off is unused (-1) or actually is zero.
> > > > Either way, no rewind is needed in that case.
> > > I agree the above should avoid touching cold cachelines in the
> > > fastpath, and looks functionally correct to me.
> > >
> > > The last word is up to Eric :)
> > >
> > An actual patch seems needed.
> >
> > In the current form, local variable peek_offset is 0 when !MSG_PEEK.
> >
> > So the "else if (peek_offset > 0)" would always be false.
> >
> Yes, of course. This wouldn't work unless we read sk->sk_peek_off at the
> beginning of the function.
> I will look at the other suggestions.
I *think* that moving sk_peek_off this way:
---
diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
index a9d99a9c583f..576a6a6abb03 100644
--- a/include/net/sock.h
+++ b/include/net/sock.h
@@ -413,7 +413,7 @@ struct sock {
unsigned int sk_napi_id;
#endif
int sk_rcvbuf;
- int sk_disconnects;
+ int sk_peek_off;
struct sk_filter __rcu *sk_filter;
union {
@@ -439,7 +439,7 @@ struct sock {
struct rb_root tcp_rtx_queue;
};
struct sk_buff_head sk_write_queue;
- __s32 sk_peek_off;
+ int sk_disconnects;
int sk_write_pending;
__u32 sk_dst_pending_confirm;
u32 sk_pacing_status; /* see enum sk_pacing */
---
should avoid problematic accesses,
The relevant cachelines layout is as follow:
/* --- cacheline 4 boundary (256 bytes) --- */
struct sk_buff * tail; /* 256 8 */
} sk_backlog; /* 240 24 */
int sk_forward_alloc; /* 264 4 */
u32 sk_reserved_mem; /* 268 4 */
unsigned int sk_ll_usec; /* 272 4 */
unsigned int sk_napi_id; /* 276 4 */
int sk_rcvbuf; /* 280 4 */
int sk_disconnects; /* 284 4 */
// will become sk_peek_off
struct sk_filter * sk_filter; /* 288 8 */
union {
struct socket_wq * sk_wq; /* 296 8 */
struct socket_wq * sk_wq_raw; /* 296 8 */
}; /* 296 8 */
struct xfrm_policy * sk_policy[2]; /* 304 16 */
/* --- cacheline 5 boundary (320 bytes) --- */
// ...
/* --- cacheline 6 boundary (384 bytes) --- */
__s32 sk_peek_off; /* 384 4 */
// will become sk_diconnects
int sk_write_pending; /* 388 4 */
__u32 sk_dst_pending_confirm; /* 392 4 */
u32 sk_pacing_status; /* 396 4 */
long int sk_sndtimeo; /* 400 8 */
struct timer_list sk_timer; /* 408 40 */
/* XXX last struct has 4 bytes of padding */
/* --- cacheline 7 boundary (448 bytes) --- */
sk_peek_off will be in the same cachline of sk_forward_alloc /
sk_reserved_mem / backlog tail, that are already touched by the
tcp_recvmsg_locked() main loop.
WDYT?
thanks!
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-16 9:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-09 22:12 [PATCH v3] tcp: add support for SO_PEEK_OFF jmaloy
2024-02-11 23:17 ` Stefano Brivio
2024-02-13 10:49 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-02-13 12:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-02-13 13:02 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-02-13 13:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-02-13 15:28 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-02-13 15:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-02-13 18:39 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-02-13 19:31 ` Eric Dumazet
[not found] ` <20687849-ec5c-9ce5-0a18-cc80f5b64816@redhat.com>
2024-02-15 17:41 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-02-15 17:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-02-15 22:24 ` Jon Maloy
2024-02-16 9:14 ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2024-02-16 9:21 ` Eric Dumazet
[not found] ` <6a9f5dec-eb0c-51ef-0911-7345f50e08f0@redhat.com>
2024-02-16 10:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-02-19 2:02 ` David Gibson
2024-02-13 23:34 ` David Gibson
2024-02-14 3:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-02-15 3:16 ` David Gibson
2024-02-15 3:21 ` David Gibson
2024-02-15 9:15 ` Eric Dumazet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9cb12376da3f6cd316320b29f294cc84eaba6cfa.camel@redhat.com \
--to=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dgibson@redhat.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jmaloy@redhat.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=passt-dev@passt.top \
--cc=sbrivio@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://passt.top/passt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for IMAP folder(s).