public inbox for passt-dev@passt.top
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	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: Mon, 19 Feb 2024 13:02:55 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZdK2z4U1naf_T6IM@zatzit> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6a9f5dec-eb0c-51ef-0911-7345f50e08f0@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6382 bytes --]

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 05:13:34AM -0500, Jon Maloy wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2024-02-16 04:21, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 10:14 AM Paolo Abeni<pabeni@redhat.com>  wrote:
> > > 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?
> > I was about to send a similar change, also moving sk_rcvtimeo, and
> > adding __cacheline_group_begin()/__cacheline_group_end
> > annotations.
> > 
> > I can finish this today.
> > 
> There is also the following alternative:
> 
> if (flags & MSG_PEEK)
>        sk_peek_offset_fwd(sk, used);
> else if (flags & MSG_TRUNC)
>        sk_peek_offset_bwd(sk, used);
> 
> This is the way we use it, and probably the typical usage.
> It would force a user to drain the receive queue with MSG_TRUNC whenever he
> is using
> MSG_PEEK_OFF, but I don't really see that as a limitation.

I really don't like this, although it would certainly do what we need
for passt/pasta.  SO_PEEK_OFF has established semantics for Unix
sockets, which includes regular recv() adjusting the offset.  Having
it behave subtlety differently for TCP seems like a very bad idea.

> Anyway, if Paolo's suggestion solves the problem this shouldn't be
> necessary.
> 
> ///jon

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-02-19  2:03 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
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 [this message]
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=ZdK2z4U1naf_T6IM@zatzit \
    --to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
    --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=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --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).