linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
To: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linuxarm@openeuler.org, hawk@kernel.org,
	Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>,
	Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>,
	Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
	Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com>,
	nogikh@google.com, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	memxor@gmail.com, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] skbuff: keep track of pp page when __skb_frag_ref() is called
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2021 08:14:44 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAKgT0UfmcB93Hn1AS_o2a_h98xxZMouTiGzJfG09qsWf+O6L1Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1630286290-43714-3-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com>

On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 6:19 PM Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> As the skb->pp_recycle and page->pp_magic may not be enough
> to track if a frag page is from page pool after the calling
> of __skb_frag_ref(), mostly because of a data race, see:
> commit 2cc3aeb5eccc ("skbuff: Fix a potential race while
> recycling page_pool packets").
>
> There may be clone and expand head case that might lose the
> track if a frag page is from page pool or not.
>
> So increment the frag count when __skb_frag_ref() is called,
> and only use page->pp_magic to indicate if a frag page is from
> page pool, to avoid the above data race.
>
> For 32 bit systems with 64 bit dma, we preserve the orginial
> behavior as frag count is used to trace how many time does a
> frag page is called with __skb_frag_ref().
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>

Is this really a common enough case to justify adding this extra overhead?

> ---
>  include/linux/skbuff.h  | 13 ++++++++++++-
>  include/net/page_pool.h | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>  net/core/page_pool.c    | 12 ++----------
>  3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> index 6bdb0db..8311482 100644
> --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
> +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
> @@ -3073,6 +3073,16 @@ static inline struct page *skb_frag_page(const skb_frag_t *frag)
>   */
>  static inline void __skb_frag_ref(skb_frag_t *frag)
>  {
> +       struct page *page = skb_frag_page(frag);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL
> +       if (!PAGE_POOL_DMA_USE_PP_FRAG_COUNT &&
> +           page_pool_is_pp_page(page)) {
> +               page_pool_atomic_inc_frag_count(page);
> +               return;
> +       }
> +#endif
> +
>         get_page(skb_frag_page(frag));
>  }
>

This just seems like a bad idea in general. We are likely increasing
the potential for issues with this patch instead of avoiding them. I
really feel it would be better for us to just give up on the page and
kick it out of the page pool if we are cloning frames and multiple
references are being taken on the pages.

> @@ -3101,7 +3111,8 @@ static inline void __skb_frag_unref(skb_frag_t *frag, bool recycle)
>         struct page *page = skb_frag_page(frag);
>
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL
> -       if (recycle && page_pool_return_skb_page(page))
> +       if ((!PAGE_POOL_DMA_USE_PP_FRAG_COUNT || recycle) &&
> +           page_pool_return_skb_page(page))
>                 return;
>  #endif
>         put_page(page);
> diff --git a/include/net/page_pool.h b/include/net/page_pool.h
> index 2ad0706..8b43e3d9 100644
> --- a/include/net/page_pool.h
> +++ b/include/net/page_pool.h
> @@ -244,6 +244,23 @@ static inline void page_pool_set_frag_count(struct page *page, long nr)
>         atomic_long_set(&page->pp_frag_count, nr);
>  }
>
> +static inline void page_pool_atomic_inc_frag_count(struct page *page)
> +{
> +       atomic_long_inc(&page->pp_frag_count);
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool page_pool_is_pp_page(struct page *page)
> +{
> +       /* page->pp_magic is OR'ed with PP_SIGNATURE after the allocation
> +        * in order to preserve any existing bits, such as bit 0 for the
> +        * head page of compound page and bit 1 for pfmemalloc page, so
> +        * mask those bits for freeing side when doing below checking,
> +        * and page_is_pfmemalloc() is checked in __page_pool_put_page()
> +        * to avoid recycling the pfmemalloc page.
> +        */
> +       return (page->pp_magic & ~0x3UL) == PP_SIGNATURE;
> +}
> +
>  static inline long page_pool_atomic_sub_frag_count_return(struct page *page,
>                                                           long nr)
>  {
> diff --git a/net/core/page_pool.c b/net/core/page_pool.c
> index ba9f14d..442d37b 100644
> --- a/net/core/page_pool.c
> +++ b/net/core/page_pool.c
> @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@
>  #define DEFER_TIME (msecs_to_jiffies(1000))
>  #define DEFER_WARN_INTERVAL (60 * HZ)
>
> -#define BIAS_MAX       LONG_MAX
> +#define BIAS_MAX       (LONG_MAX / 2)

This piece needs some explaining in the patch. Why are you changing
the BIAS_MAX?

>  static int page_pool_init(struct page_pool *pool,
>                           const struct page_pool_params *params)
> @@ -741,15 +741,7 @@ bool page_pool_return_skb_page(struct page *page)
>         struct page_pool *pp;
>
>         page = compound_head(page);
> -
> -       /* page->pp_magic is OR'ed with PP_SIGNATURE after the allocation
> -        * in order to preserve any existing bits, such as bit 0 for the
> -        * head page of compound page and bit 1 for pfmemalloc page, so
> -        * mask those bits for freeing side when doing below checking,
> -        * and page_is_pfmemalloc() is checked in __page_pool_put_page()
> -        * to avoid recycling the pfmemalloc page.
> -        */
> -       if (unlikely((page->pp_magic & ~0x3UL) != PP_SIGNATURE))
> +       if (!page_pool_is_pp_page(page))
>                 return false;
>
>         pp = page->pp;
> --
> 2.7.4
>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-08-30 15:15 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-08-30  1:18 [PATCH net-next 0/2] some optimization for page pool Yunsheng Lin
2021-08-30  1:18 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] page_pool: support non-split page with PP_FLAG_PAGE_FRAG Yunsheng Lin
2021-08-30 15:05   ` Alexander Duyck
2021-08-31  6:14     ` Yunsheng Lin
2021-08-31 13:43       ` Alexander Duyck
2021-08-30  1:18 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] skbuff: keep track of pp page when __skb_frag_ref() is called Yunsheng Lin
2021-08-30  4:50   ` kernel test robot
2021-08-30 15:14   ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2021-08-31  7:20     ` Yunsheng Lin
2021-08-31 14:30       ` Alexander Duyck
2021-09-01  3:10         ` Yunsheng Lin

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=CAKgT0UfmcB93Hn1AS_o2a_h98xxZMouTiGzJfG09qsWf+O6L1Q@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
    --cc=alobakin@pm.me \
    --cc=cong.wang@bytedance.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=haokexin@gmail.com \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
    --cc=jonathan.lemon@gmail.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxarm@openeuler.org \
    --cc=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nogikh@google.com \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=willemb@google.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).