From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54603C433DB for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 18:42:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 144BB64E54 for ; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 18:42:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233548AbhBISln (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Feb 2021 13:41:43 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36572 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233482AbhBIS25 (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Feb 2021 13:28:57 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x634.google.com (mail-ej1-x634.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::634]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99288C061756; Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:27:33 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x634.google.com with SMTP id lg21so33377490ejb.3; Tue, 09 Feb 2021 10:27:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=CfDqyLnGO3R9/tU1jtuvsLPKqTHeoZerZQhn3YtIEsc=; b=E3fVlR4xZaBsMMv+21Fv5aZrG8FFOnIjWjgdf0ZmLsS5U3gV9ZaZrxuDp3xTBZ2T+K kuRT+/+NUWacStSYy42F9qqE+2Tyek3I8oy+GJCFJkC68gPBAdgzbGk7j+7w3Axnjzu1 sxoX5Bu77e3pJv6Y0F3P3VFWzz7wLgsn2M48PyHWtRy/0Vf1/todm2dM5v5HZN1fHN08 ebiihzg4kqsnWRD1KnKL+/Fv+ax1Zz0tiMS7STzT6HohSZ3zUMdxCanKjFxUR5tnZ/Dr jOVwzPE5XWzxs4Yk724Xf+p9uC7QCnj0EGFKRKru6R0DipSjlnY8F6w3JGilvsxzj2M8 i3gQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=CfDqyLnGO3R9/tU1jtuvsLPKqTHeoZerZQhn3YtIEsc=; b=eZo1xv1Hz9jNHB8L4QgupTdANu6YBapbPQCQSo+jQyAijuHzxys0HZ89sy8CP1uNHb yHhDsZqpvvOgPiXDpFquPNwZ+gjmSrf1mgkkcYysyOs/8a0vDbwKvi8QK4v9adXCFW/Z sqoCV5QqfxAzjzqPbg11Mjkwdo7ZhgcHYgZ2NPnO9lI5r2Xi9yIG9RDnHj0kNGl2P7NT qSKCEUY9pSz8fscDDjpmOYH/FIy7A0gw9RHLBsR2rhDL+HQQwvmQv4hKZog29/8SxQRa ZqXu/JtGK4NvODgbbVm0wQm308F/njwgTmO9ZV9kETgjFd9HRrraeDUinsJUun1Qftwa Jdvg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531tqPVYY9W47PBxN8ixaZx9mKrYRes1DAI06smhjvJndmhvLtrM eA3+caU/moDRHt/mtZrtzdo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwop7KzymjFdO3HILK+JaBIhfeOERIiiieVTf2rtcP7Pa9bEaZFD1UbGGWiiQCVEnu7ilsjjQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:6087:: with SMTP id t7mr24144819ejj.90.1612895247065; Tue, 09 Feb 2021 10:27:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from skbuf (5-12-227-87.residential.rdsnet.ro. [5.12.227.87]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id hb24sm9694157ejb.16.2021.02.09.10.27.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 09 Feb 2021 10:27:25 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 20:27:24 +0200 From: Vladimir Oltean To: Jakub Kicinski , "David S. Miller" Cc: Andrew Lunn , Vivien Didelot , Florian Fainelli , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org, Roopa Prabhu , Nikolay Aleksandrov , Jiri Pirko , Ido Schimmel , Claudiu Manoil , Alexandre Belloni , UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com, Vadym Kochan , Taras Chornyi , Grygorii Strashko , Ioana Ciornei , Ivan Vecera , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 02/11] net: bridge: offload all port flags at once in br_setport Message-ID: <20210209182724.b4funpoqh6kgoj6z@skbuf> References: <20210209151936.97382-1-olteanv@gmail.com> <20210209151936.97382-3-olteanv@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210209151936.97382-3-olteanv@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 05:19:27PM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote: > From: Vladimir Oltean > > The br_switchdev_set_port_flag function uses the atomic notifier call > chain because br_setport runs in an atomic section (under br->lock). > This is because port flag changes need to be synchronized with the data > path. But actually the switchdev notifier doesn't need that, only > br_set_port_flag does. So we can collect all the port flag changes and > only emit the notification at the end, then revert the changes if the > switchdev notification failed. > > There's also the other aspect: if for example this command: > > ip link set swp0 type bridge_slave flood off mcast_flood off learning off > > succeeded at configuring BR_FLOOD and BR_MCAST_FLOOD but not at > BR_LEARNING, there would be no attempt to revert the partial state in > any way. Arguably, if the user changes more than one flag through the > same netlink command, this one _should_ be all or nothing, which means > it should be passed through switchdev as all or nothing. > > Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean > --- (...) > + spin_lock_bh(&p->br->lock); > + > + old_flags = p->flags; > + br_vlan_tunnel_old = (old_flags & BR_VLAN_TUNNEL) ? true : false; > + > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_MODE, BR_HAIRPIN_MODE); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_GUARD, BR_BPDU_GUARD); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_FAST_LEAVE, > + BR_MULTICAST_FAST_LEAVE); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_PROTECT, BR_ROOT_BLOCK); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_LEARNING, BR_LEARNING); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_UNICAST_FLOOD, BR_FLOOD); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_MCAST_FLOOD, BR_MCAST_FLOOD); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_MCAST_TO_UCAST, > + BR_MULTICAST_TO_UNICAST); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_BCAST_FLOOD, BR_BCAST_FLOOD); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_PROXYARP, BR_PROXYARP); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_PROXYARP_WIFI, BR_PROXYARP_WIFI); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_VLAN_TUNNEL, BR_VLAN_TUNNEL); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_NEIGH_SUPPRESS, BR_NEIGH_SUPPRESS); > + br_set_port_flag(p, tb, IFLA_BRPORT_ISOLATED, BR_ISOLATED); > + > + changed_mask = old_flags ^ p->flags; > + > + spin_unlock_bh(&p->br->lock); > + > + err = br_switchdev_set_port_flag(p, p->flags, changed_mask); > + if (err) { > + spin_lock_bh(&p->br->lock); > + p->flags = old_flags; > + spin_unlock_bh(&p->br->lock); > return err; > + } > I know it's a bit strange to insert this in the middle of review, but bear with me. While I was reworking the patch series to also make sysfs non-atomic, like this: -----------------------------[cut here]----------------------------- >From 6ff6714b6686e4f9406425edf15db6c92e944954 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Vladimir Oltean Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 19:43:40 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] net: bridge: temporarily drop br->lock for br_switchdev_set_port_flag in sysfs Since we would like br_switchdev_set_port_flag to not use an atomic notifier, it should be called from outside spinlock context. Dropping the lock creates some concurrency complications: - There might be an "echo 1 > multicast_flood" simultaneous with an "echo 0 > multicast_flood". The result of this is nondeterministic either way, so I'm not too concerned as long as the result is consistent (no other flags have changed). - There might be an "echo 1 > multicast_flood" simultaneous with an "echo 0 > learning". My expectation is that none of the two writes are "eaten", and the final flags contain BR_MCAST_FLOOD=1 and BR_LEARNING=0 regardless of the order of execution. That is actually possible if, on the commit path, we don't do a trivial "p->flags = flags" which might overwrite bits outside of our mask, but instead we just change the flags corresponding to our mask. Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean --- net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c | 24 +++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c b/net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c index 62540b31e356..b419d9aad548 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c +++ b/net/bridge/br_sysfs_if.c @@ -68,17 +68,23 @@ static int store_flag(struct net_bridge_port *p, unsigned long v, else flags &= ~mask; - if (flags != p->flags) { - err = br_switchdev_set_port_flag(p, flags, mask, &extack); - if (err) { - if (extack._msg) - netdev_err(p->dev, "%s\n", extack._msg); - return err; - } + if (flags == p->flags) + return 0; - p->flags = flags; - br_port_flags_change(p, mask); + spin_unlock_bh(&p->br->lock); + err = br_switchdev_set_port_flag(p, flags, mask, &extack); + spin_lock_bh(&p->br->lock); + if (err) { + if (extack._msg) + netdev_err(p->dev, "%s\n", extack._msg); + return err; } + + p->flags &= ~mask; + p->flags |= (flags & mask); + + br_port_flags_change(p, mask); + return 0; } -----------------------------[cut here]----------------------------- I figured there's a similar problem in this patch, which I had missed. The code now looks like this: changed_mask = old_flags ^ p->flags; flags = p->flags; spin_unlock_bh(&p->br->lock); err = br_switchdev_set_port_flag(p, flags, changed_mask, extack); if (err) { spin_lock_bh(&p->br->lock); p->flags &= ~changed_mask; p->flags |= (old_flags & changed_mask); spin_unlock_bh(&p->br->lock); return err; } spin_lock_bh(&p->br->lock); where I no longer access p->flags directly when calling br_switchdev_set_port_flag (because I'm not protected by br->lock) but a copy of it saved on stack. Also, I restore just the mask portion of p->flags. But there's an interesting side effect of allowing br_switchdev_set_port_flag to run concurrently (notifier call chains use a rw_semaphore and only take the read side). Basically now drivers that cache the brport flags in their entirety are broken, because there isn't any guarantee that bits outside the mask are valid any longer (we can even enforce that by masking the flags with the mask when notifying them). They would need to do the same trick of updating just the masked part of their cached flags. Except for the fact that they would need some sort of spinlock too, I don't think that the basic bitwise operations are atomic or anything like that. I'm a bit reluctant to add a spinlock in prestera, rocker, mlxsw just for this purpose. What do you think?