bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 29/35] bpf: libbpf: cleanup RLIMIT_MEMLOCK usage
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2020 18:38:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200730013836.GA637520@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzamC4RQrQuAgH1DK-qcW3cKFuBEbYRhVz-8UMU+mbTcvA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:59:33PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 4:15 PM Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 03:05:11PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:21 PM Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As bpf is not using memlock rlimit for memory accounting anymore,
> > > > let's remove the related code from libbpf.
> > > >
> > > > Bpf operations can't fail because of exceeding the limit anymore.
> > > >
> > >
> > > They can't in the newest kernel, but libbpf will keep working and
> > > supporting old kernels for a very long time now. So please don't
> > > remove any of this.
> >
> > Yeah, good point, agree.
> > So we just can drop this patch from the series, no other changes
> > are needed.
> >
> > >
> > > But it would be nice to add a detection of whether kernel needs a
> > > RLIMIT_MEMLOCK bump or not. Is there some simple and reliable way to
> > > detect this from user-space?

Btw, do you mean we should add a new function to the libbpf API?
Or just extend pr_perm_msg() to skip guessing on new kernels?

The problem with the latter one is that it's called on a failed attempt
to create a map, so unlikely we'll be able to create a new one just to test
for the "memlock" value. But it also raises a question what should we do
if the creation of this temporarily map fails? Assume the old kernel and
bump the limit?
Idk, maybe it's better to just leave the userspace code as it is for some time.

Thanks!

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-30  1:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-27 18:44 [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/35] bpf: switch to memcg-based memory accounting Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 01/35] bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for bpf progs Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 22:11   ` Song Liu
2020-07-28  0:08     ` Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  4:42       ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 02/35] bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for bpf maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 22:12   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 03/35] bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for arraymap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 22:30   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 04/35] bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for cpumap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 22:48   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 05/35] bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for cgroup storage maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 23:05   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 06/35] bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for devmap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 23:35   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/35] bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for hashtab maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 23:36   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 08/35] bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for lpm_trie maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 23:55   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 09/35] bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for bpf ringbuffer Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 23:56   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 10/35] bpf: memcg-based memory accounting for socket storage maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 23:57   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 11/35] bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for sockmap and sockhash maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 23:58   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 12/35] bpf: refine memcg-based memory accounting for xskmap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  0:01   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 13/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for arraymap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  0:04   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 14/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for bpf_struct_ops maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:29   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for cpumap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:30   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 16/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for cgroup storage maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:31   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 17/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for devmap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:31   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 18/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for hashtab maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:32   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 19/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for lpm_trie maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:32   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 20/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for queue_stack_maps maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:35   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 21/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for reuseport_array maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:36   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 22/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for bpf ringbuffer Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:37   ` Song Liu
2020-07-28  5:56   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 23/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for sockmap and sockhash maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:37   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 24/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for stackmap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:38   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 25/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for socket storage maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:41   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 26/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for xskmap maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:42   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 27/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting infra for bpf maps Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:47   ` Song Liu
2020-07-28  5:58     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-28  6:06       ` Song Liu
2020-07-28 19:08         ` Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28 19:16           ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-27 18:44 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 28/35] bpf: eliminate rlimit-based memory accounting for bpf progs Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:55   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 29/35] bpf: libbpf: cleanup RLIMIT_MEMLOCK usage Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 22:05   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-27 22:44     ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 23:15     ` Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  5:59       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-30  1:38         ` Roman Gushchin [this message]
2020-07-30 19:39           ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-30 20:46             ` Roman Gushchin
2020-07-27 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 30/35] bpf: bpftool: do not touch RLIMIT_MEMLOCK Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  6:00   ` Song Liu
2020-07-28  6:00   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-27 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 31/35] bpf: runqslower: don't " Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  6:03   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-27 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 32/35] bpf: selftests: delete bpf_rlimit.h Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  6:06   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-28  6:11     ` Song Liu
2020-07-28 18:30       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-27 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 33/35] bpf: selftests: don't touch RLIMIT_MEMLOCK Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  6:08   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-27 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 34/35] bpf: samples: do not " Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  6:14   ` Song Liu
2020-07-27 18:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 35/35] perf: don't " Roman Gushchin
2020-07-28  6:09   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-07-28 12:13     ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo

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=20200730013836.GA637520@carbon.dhcp.thefacebook.com \
    --to=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).