bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: "Björn Töpel" <bjorn.topel@intel.com>,
	"Björn Töpel" <bjorn.topel@gmail.com>,
	ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: magnus.karlsson@intel.com, maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com,
	kuba@kernel.org, jonathan.lemon@gmail.com, maximmi@nvidia.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, hawk@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
	ciara.loftus@intel.com, weqaar.a.janjua@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/8] xsk: register XDP sockets at bind(), and add new AF_XDP BPF helper
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 21:26:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87pn1z2w38.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ca8cbe21-f020-e5c0-5f09-19260e95839f@intel.com>

Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> writes:

> On 2021-01-20 18:29, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> writes:
>> 
>>> On 2021-01-20 15:54, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>>>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2021-01-20 13:50, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>>>>>> Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>>>>> index c001766adcbc..bbc7d9a57262 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>>>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>>>>> @@ -3836,6 +3836,12 @@ union bpf_attr {
>>>>>>>      *	Return
>>>>>>>      *		A pointer to a struct socket on success or NULL if the file is
>>>>>>>      *		not a socket.
>>>>>>> + *
>>>>>>> + * long bpf_redirect_xsk(struct xdp_buff *xdp_md, u64 action)
>>>>>>> + *	Description
>>>>>>> + *		Redirect to the registered AF_XDP socket.
>>>>>>> + *	Return
>>>>>>> + *		**XDP_REDIRECT** on success, otherwise the action parameter is returned.
>>>>>>>      */
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it would be better to make the second argument a 'flags'
>>>>>> argument and make values > XDP_TX invalid (like we do in
>>>>>> bpf_xdp_redirect_map() now). By allowing any value as return you lose
>>>>>> the ability to turn it into a flags argument later...
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, but that adds a run-time check. I prefer this non-checked version,
>>>>> even though it is a bit less futureproof.
>>>>
>>>> That...seems a bit short-sighted? :)
>>>> Can you actually see a difference in your performance numbers?
>>>>
>>>
>>> I would rather add an additional helper *if* we see the need for flags,
>>> instead of paying for that upfront. For me, BPF is about being able to
>>> specialize, and not having one call with tons of checks.
>> 
>> I get that, I'm just pushing back because omitting a 'flags' argument is
>> literally among the most frequent reasons for having to replace a
>> syscall (see e.g., [0]) instead of extending it. And yeah, I do realise
>> that the performance implications are different for XDP than for
>> syscalls, but maintainability of the API is also important; it's all a
>> tradeoff. This will be the third redirect helper variant for XDP and I'd
>> hate for the fourth one to have to be bpf_redirect_xsk_flags() because
>> it did turn out to be needed...
>> 
>> (One potential concrete reason for this: I believe Magnus was talking
>> about an API that would allow a BPF program to redirect a packet into
>> more than one socket (cloning it in the process), or to redirect to a
>> socket+another target. How would you do that with this new helper?)
>> 
>> [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/585415/
>>
>
> I have a bit of different view. One of the really nice parts about BPF
> is exactly specialization. A user can tailor the kernel do a specific
> thing. I *don't* see an issue with yet another helper, if that is needed
> in the future. I think that is better than bloated helpers trying to
> cope for all scenarios. I don't mean we should just add helpers all over
> the place, but I do see more lightly on adding helpers, than adding
> syscalls.
>
> Elaborating a bit on this: many device drivers try to handle all the
> things in the fast-path. I see BPF as one way forward to moving away
> from that. Setup what you need, and only run what you currently need,
> instead of the current "Is bleh on, then baz? Is this on, then that."
>
> So, I would like to avoid "future proofing" the helpers, if that makes
> sense. Use what you need. That's why BPF is so good (one of the
> things)!

Well, it's a tradeoff. We're still defining an API that should not be
(too) confusing...

> As for bpf_redirect_xsk() it's a leaner version of bpf_redirect_map().
> You want flags/shared sockets/...? Well go use bpf_redirect_map() and
> XSKMAP. bpf_redirect_xsk() is not for you.

This argument, however, I buy: bpf_redirect() is the single-purpose
helper for redirecting to an ifindex, bpf_redirect_xsk() is the
single-purpose helper for redirecting to an XSK, and bpf_redirect_map()
is the generic one that does both of those and more. Fair enough,
consider me convinced :)

> A lot of back-and-forth for *one* if-statement, but it's kind of a
> design thing for me. ;-)

Surely you don't mean to imply that you have *better* things to do with
your time than have a 10-emails-long argument over a single if
statement? ;)

-Toke


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-20 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-19 15:50 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/8] Introduce bpf_redirect_xsk() helper Björn Töpel
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/8] xdp: restructure redirect actions Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 12:44   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 13:40     ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 14:52       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 15:49         ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 16:30           ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 17:26             ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/8] xsk: remove explicit_free parameter from __xsk_rcv() Björn Töpel
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/8] xsk: fold xp_assign_dev and __xp_assign_dev Björn Töpel
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/8] xsk: register XDP sockets at bind(), and add new AF_XDP BPF helper Björn Töpel
2021-01-20  8:25   ` kernel test robot
2021-01-20  8:41     ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20  8:50   ` kernel test robot
2021-01-20 12:50   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 13:25     ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 14:54       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 15:18         ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 17:29           ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 18:22             ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 20:26               ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2021-01-20 21:15                 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-01-21  8:18                   ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/8] libbpf, xsk: select AF_XDP BPF program based on kernel version Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 12:52   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 13:25     ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 14:49       ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 15:11         ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 15:27           ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 17:30             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-20 18:25             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-01-20 18:30               ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 14:56       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 6/8] libbpf, xsk: select bpf_redirect_xsk(), if supported Björn Töpel
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 7/8] selftest/bpf: add XDP socket tests for bpf_redirect_{xsk, map}() Björn Töpel
2021-01-21  7:39   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-01-21 12:31     ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-19 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 8/8] selftest/bpf: remove a lot of ifobject casting in xdpxceiver Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 13:15 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/8] Introduce bpf_redirect_xsk() helper Maxim Mikityanskiy
2021-01-20 13:27   ` Björn Töpel
2021-01-20 15:57   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2021-01-20 16:19     ` Maciej Fijalkowski
2021-01-21 17:01       ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2021-01-22  8:59         ` Magnus Karlsson
2021-01-22  9:45           ` Maciej Fijalkowski

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=87pn1z2w38.fsf@toke.dk \
    --to=toke@redhat.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bjorn.topel@gmail.com \
    --cc=bjorn.topel@intel.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ciara.loftus@intel.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jonathan.lemon@gmail.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
    --cc=magnus.karlsson@intel.com \
    --cc=maximmi@nvidia.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=weqaar.a.janjua@intel.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/8] xsk: register XDP sockets at bind(), and add new AF_XDP BPF helper' \
    /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

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).