Re: [PATCH net-next 00/11] Add drop monitor for offloaded data paths - Toke Høiland-Jørgensen

From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, jiri@mellanox.com, mlxsw@mellanox.com,
	dsahern@gmail.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com,
	nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, andy@greyhouse.net,
	pablo@netfilter.org, jakub.kicinski@netronome.com,
	pieter.jansenvanvuuren@netronome.com, andrew@lunn.ch,
	f.fainelli@gmail.com, vivien.didelot@gmail.com,
	idosch@mellanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/11] Add drop monitor for offloaded data paths
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 11:27:55 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r26vvbz8.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190711235354.GA30396@hmswarspite.think-freely.org>

Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com> writes:

> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 03:39:09PM +0300, Ido Schimmel wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 07, 2019 at 12:45:41PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> > From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
>> > Date: Sun,  7 Jul 2019 10:58:17 +0300
>> > 
>> > > Users have several ways to debug the kernel and understand why a packet
>> > > was dropped. For example, using "drop monitor" and "perf". Both
>> > > utilities trace kfree_skb(), which is the function called when a packet
>> > > is freed as part of a failure. The information provided by these tools
>> > > is invaluable when trying to understand the cause of a packet loss.
>> > > 
>> > > In recent years, large portions of the kernel data path were offloaded
>> > > to capable devices. Today, it is possible to perform L2 and L3
>> > > forwarding in hardware, as well as tunneling (IP-in-IP and VXLAN).
>> > > Different TC classifiers and actions are also offloaded to capable
>> > > devices, at both ingress and egress.
>> > > 
>> > > However, when the data path is offloaded it is not possible to achieve
>> > > the same level of introspection as tools such "perf" and "drop monitor"
>> > > become irrelevant.
>> > > 
>> > > This patchset aims to solve this by allowing users to monitor packets
>> > > that the underlying device decided to drop along with relevant metadata
>> > > such as the drop reason and ingress port.
>> > 
>> > We are now going to have 5 or so ways to capture packets passing through
>> > the system, this is nonsense.
>> > 
>> > AF_PACKET, kfree_skb drop monitor, perf, XDP perf events, and now this
>> > devlink thing.
>> > 
>> > This is insanity, too many ways to do the same thing and therefore the
>> > worst possible user experience.
>> > 
>> > Pick _ONE_ method to trap packets and forward normal kfree_skb events,
>> > XDP perf events, and these taps there too.
>> > 
>> > I mean really, think about it from the average user's perspective.  To
>> > see all drops/pkts I have to attach a kfree_skb tracepoint, and not just
>> > listen on devlink but configure a special tap thing beforehand and then
>> > if someone is using XDP I gotta setup another perf event buffer capture
>> > thing too.
>> 
>> Dave,
>> 
>> Before I start working on v2, I would like to get your feedback on the
>> high level plan. Also adding Neil who is the maintainer of drop_monitor
>> (and counterpart DropWatch tool [1]).
>> 
>> IIUC, the problem you point out is that users need to use different
>> tools to monitor packet drops based on where these drops occur
>> (SW/HW/XDP).
>> 
>> Therefore, my plan is to extend the existing drop_monitor netlink
>> channel to also cover HW drops. I will add a new message type and a new
>> multicast group for HW drops and encode in the message what is currently
>> encoded in the devlink events.
>> 
> A few things here:
> IIRC we don't announce individual hardware drops, drivers record them in
> internal structures, and they are retrieved on demand via ethtool calls, so you
> will either need to include some polling (probably not a very performant idea),
> or some sort of flagging mechanism to indicate that on the next message sent to
> user space you should go retrieve hw stats from a given interface.  I certainly
> wouldn't mind seeing this happen, but its more work than just adding a new
> netlink message.
>
> Also, regarding XDP drops, we wont see them if the xdp program is offloaded to
> hardware (you'll need your hw drop gathering mechanism for that), but for xdp
> programs run on the cpu, dropwatch should alrady catch those.  I.e. if the xdp
> program returns a DROP result for a packet being processed, the OS will call
> kfree_skb on its behalf, and dropwatch wil call that.

There is no skb by the time an XDP program runs, so this is not true. As
I mentioned upthread, there's a tracepoint that will get called if an
error occurs (or the program returns XDP_ABORTED), but in most cases,
XDP_DROP just means that the packet silently disappears...

-Toke