From: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>,
"daniel@iogearbox.net" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf: add mmap() support for BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:39:08 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <B968B10D-3506-4C4E-B2D5-36707F05E75F@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzY2gp9DR+cdcr4DFhOYc8xkHOOSSf9MiJ6P+54USa8zog@mail.gmail.com>
> On Nov 8, 2019, at 11:34 AM, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 10:39 PM Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Nov 7, 2019, at 8:20 PM, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Add ability to memory-map contents of BPF array map. This is extremely useful
>>> for working with BPF global data from userspace programs. It allows to avoid
>>> typical bpf_map_{lookup,update}_elem operations, improving both performance
>>> and usability.
>>>
>>> There had to be special considerations for map freezing, to avoid having
>>> writable memory view into a frozen map. To solve this issue, map freezing and
>>> mmap-ing is happening under mutex now:
>>> - if map is already frozen, no writable mapping is allowed;
>>> - if map has writable memory mappings active (accounted in map->writecnt),
>>> map freezing will keep failing with -EBUSY;
>>> - once number of writable memory mappings drops to zero, map freezing can be
>>> performed again.
>>>
>>> Only non-per-CPU arrays are supported right now. Maps with spinlocks can't be
>>> memory mapped either.
>>>
>>> Cc: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
>>> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
>>
>> Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
>>
>> With one nit below.
>>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> - if (percpu)
>>> + data_size = 0;
>>> + if (percpu) {
>>> array_size += (u64) max_entries * sizeof(void *);
>>> - else
>>> - array_size += (u64) max_entries * elem_size;
>>
>>> + } else {
>>> + if (attr->map_flags & BPF_F_MMAPABLE) {
>>> + data_size = (u64) max_entries * elem_size;
>>> + data_size = round_up(data_size, PAGE_SIZE);
>>> + } else {
>>> + array_size += (u64) max_entries * elem_size;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>>
>>> /* make sure there is no u32 overflow later in round_up() */
>>> - cost = array_size;
>>> + cost = array_size + data_size;
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a little confusing. Maybe we can do
>>
>
> I don't think I can do that without even bigger code churn. In
> non-mmap()-able case, array_size specifies the size of one chunk of
> memory, which consists of sizeof(struct bpf_array) bytes, followed by
> actual data. This is accomplished in one allocation. That's current
> case for arrays.
>
> For BPF_F_MMAPABLE case, though, we have to do 2 separate allocations,
> to make sure that mmap()-able part is allocated with vmalloc() and is
> page-aligned. So array_size keeps track of number of bytes allocated
> for struct bpf_array plus, optionally, per-cpu or non-mmapable array
> data, while data_size is explicitly for vmalloc()-ed mmap()-able chunk
> of data. If not for this, I'd just keep adjusting array_size.
>
> So the invariant for per-cpu and non-mmapable case is that data_size =
> 0, array_size = sizeof(struct bpf_array) + whatever amount of data we
> need. For mmapable case: array_size = sizeof(struct bpf_array),
> data_size = actual amount of array data.
I see. Thanks for the explanation.
Song
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-11 16:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-08 4:20 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Add support for memory-mapping BPF array maps Andrii Nakryiko
2019-11-08 4:20 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf: add mmap() support for BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY Andrii Nakryiko
2019-11-08 6:39 ` Song Liu
2019-11-08 19:34 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-11-11 16:39 ` Song Liu [this message]
2019-11-08 4:20 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] libbpf: make global data internal arrays mmap()-able, if possible Andrii Nakryiko
2019-11-08 6:44 ` Song Liu
2019-11-08 19:34 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-11-08 4:20 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: add BPF_TYPE_MAP_ARRAY mmap() tests Andrii Nakryiko
2019-11-08 6:49 ` Song Liu
2019-11-08 22:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Add support for memory-mapping BPF array maps Stanislav Fomichev
2019-11-08 23:19 ` Andrii Nakryiko
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=B968B10D-3506-4C4E-B2D5-36707F05E75F@fb.com \
--to=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andriin@fb.com \
--cc=ast@fb.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.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.
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).