Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Introduce bpf_timer

[Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 11:56:40PM IST, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 11:14 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
> <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 11:24:36PM IST, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 10:48:02AM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> > > > Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> writes:
> > > >
> > > > >> > In general the garbage collection in any form doesn't scale.
> > > > >> > The conntrack logic doesn't need it. The cillium conntrack is a great
> > > > >> > example of how to implement a conntrack without GC.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> That is simply not a conntrack. We expire connections based on
> > > > >> its time, not based on the size of the map where it residents.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sounds like your goal is to replicate existing kernel conntrack
> > > > > as bpf program by doing exactly the same algorithm and repeating
> > > > > the same mistakes. Then add kernel conntrack functions to allow list
> > > > > of kfuncs (unstable helpers) and call them from your bpf progs.
> > > >
> > > > FYI, we're working on exactly this (exposing kernel conntrack to BPF).
> > > > Hoping to have something to show for our efforts before too long, but
> > > > it's still in a bit of an early stage...
> > > Just curious, what conntrack functions will be made callable to BPF?
> >
> > Initially we're planning to expose the equivalent of nf_conntrack_in and
> > nf_conntrack_confirm to XDP and TC programs (so XDP one works without an skb,
> > and TC one works with an skb), to map these to higher level lookup/insert.
>
> To make sure we're on the same page...
> I still strongly prefer to avoid exposing conntrack via stable helpers.
> Pls use kfunc and unstable interface.

Correct, that is the idea.

--
Kartikeya