From: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@google.com>,
linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, Dmitriy Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
rusty@rustcorp.com.au, amit@kernel.org, akong@redhat.com,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Matt Mackall <mpm@selenic.com>,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] hwrng: virtio - add an internal buffer
Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2021 15:30:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40a84813-afc4-049b-2713-8bdad9c4bc20@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211005075433-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
On 05/10/2021 13:55, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 09:34:18AM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>> On 23/09/2021 09:04, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 08:26:06AM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>>> On 22/09/2021 21:02, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 07:09:00PM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>>>>> hwrng core uses two buffers that can be mixed in the
>>>>>> virtio-rng queue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the buffer is provided with wait=0 it is enqueued in the
>>>>>> virtio-rng queue but unused by the caller.
>>>>>> On the next call, core provides another buffer but the
>>>>>> first one is filled instead and the new one queued.
>>>>>> And the caller reads the data from the new one that is not
>>>>>> updated, and the data in the first one are lost.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To avoid this mix, virtio-rng needs to use its own unique
>>>>>> internal buffer at a cost of a data copy to the caller buffer.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c b/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c
>>>>>> index a90001e02bf7..208c547dcac1 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c
>>>>>> @@ -18,13 +18,20 @@ static DEFINE_IDA(rng_index_ida);
>>>>>> struct virtrng_info {
>>>>>> struct hwrng hwrng;
>>>>>> struct virtqueue *vq;
>>>>>> - struct completion have_data;
>>>>>> char name[25];
>>>>>> - unsigned int data_avail;
>>>>>> int index;
>>>>>> bool busy;
>>>>>> bool hwrng_register_done;
>>>>>> bool hwrng_removed;
>>>>>> + /* data transfer */
>>>>>> + struct completion have_data;
>>>>>> + unsigned int data_avail;
>>>>>> + /* minimal size returned by rng_buffer_size() */
>>>>>> +#if SMP_CACHE_BYTES < 32
>>>>>> + u8 data[32];
>>>>>> +#else
>>>>>> + u8 data[SMP_CACHE_BYTES];
>>>>>> +#endif
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's move this logic to a macro in hw_random.h ?
>>>>>
>>>>>> };
>>>>>> static void random_recv_done(struct virtqueue *vq)
>>>>>> @@ -39,14 +46,14 @@ static void random_recv_done(struct virtqueue *vq)
>>>>>> }
>>>>>> /* The host will fill any buffer we give it with sweet, sweet randomness. */
>>>>>> -static void register_buffer(struct virtrng_info *vi, u8 *buf, size_t size)
>>>>>> +static void register_buffer(struct virtrng_info *vi)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct scatterlist sg;
>>>>>> - sg_init_one(&sg, buf, size);
>>>>>> + sg_init_one(&sg, vi->data, sizeof(vi->data));
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that add_early_randomness requests less:
>>>>> size_t size = min_t(size_t, 16, rng_buffer_size());
>>>>>
>>>>> maybe track how much was requested and grow up to sizeof(data)?
>>>>
>>>> I think this problem is managed by PATCH 3/4 as we reuse unused data of the buffer.
>>>
>>> the issue I'm pointing out is that we are requesting too much
>>> entropy from host - more than guest needs.
>>
>> Yes, guest asks for 16 bytes, but we request SMP_CACHE_BYTES (64 on x86_64),
>> and these 16 bytes are used with add_device_randomness(). With the following
>> patches, the remaining 48 bytes are used rapidly by hwgnd kthread or by the
>> next virtio_read.
>>
>> If there is no enough entropy the call is simply ignored as wait=0.
>>
>> At this patch level the call is always simply ignored (because wait=0) and
>> the data requested here are used by the next read that always asks for a
>> SMP_CACHE_BYTES bytes data size.
>>
>> Moreover in PATCH 4/4 we always have a pending request of size
>> SMP_CACHE_BYTES, so driver always asks a block of this size and the guest
>> takes what it needs.
>>
>> Originally I used a 16 bytes block but performance are divided by 4.
>>
>> Do you propose something else?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Laurent
>
> Maybe min(size, sizeof(vi->data))?
>
But it means, in the case of mixed buffers, we will ask 16 bytes on the first call, not
use it, and ask SMP_CACHE_BYTES bytes on the next call to get only 16:
- add_early_randomness() asks for 16 bytes but wait = 0 and thus the request is queued but
not used. add_early_randomness() is called when we switch from one hw_random backend to
another (so generally only once...)
- hwrng_fillfn() and rng_dev_read() always ask rng_buffer_size() (max(32, SMP_CACHE_BYTES)).
So we can say we use SMP_CACHE_BYTES in 99% of the cases.
Moreover, this will be discarded by patch 3 and 4 as we have a loop to ask more data in a
fixed size buffer.
I'm not sure it's worth introducing this change in this patch.
Thanks,
Laurent
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-05 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-22 17:08 [PATCH 0/4] hwrng: virtio - add an internal buffer Laurent Vivier
2021-09-22 17:09 ` [PATCH 1/4] " Laurent Vivier
2021-09-22 19:02 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-09-23 6:26 ` Laurent Vivier
2021-09-23 7:04 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-09-23 7:34 ` Laurent Vivier
2021-10-05 11:55 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-10-05 13:30 ` Laurent Vivier [this message]
2021-09-22 17:09 ` [PATCH 2/4] hwrng: virtio - don't wait on cleanup Laurent Vivier
2021-09-22 17:09 ` [PATCH 3/4] hwrng: virtio - don't waste entropy Laurent Vivier
2021-09-22 17:09 ` [PATCH 4/4] hwrng: virtio - always add a pending request Laurent Vivier
2021-09-22 17:50 ` [PATCH 0/4] hwrng: virtio - add an internal buffer Alexander Potapenko
2021-10-05 11:40 ` Laurent Vivier
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=40a84813-afc4-049b-2713-8bdad9c4bc20@redhat.com \
--to=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=akong@redhat.com \
--cc=amit@kernel.org \
--cc=dvyukov@google.com \
--cc=glider@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpm@selenic.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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).