From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v7 6/8] xfrm: speed-up lookup of HW policies
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 08:23:47 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4Bfc/GuJUumvY7V@unreal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221124110748.GP424616@gauss3.secunet.de>
On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 12:07:48PM +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 02:53:10PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 11:36:19AM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > Thanks for an explanation, trying it now.
> >
> > Something like that?
>
> Yes :)
Great, will send proper version on Sunday.
>
> >
> > The code is untested yet.
> >
> > diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
> > index 5076f9d7a752..5819023c32ba 100644
> > --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
> > +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
> > @@ -1115,6 +1115,19 @@ xfrm_state_find(const xfrm_address_t *daddr, const xfrm_address_t *saddr,
> > rcu_read_lock();
> > h = xfrm_dst_hash(net, daddr, saddr, tmpl->reqid, encap_family);
> > hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(x, net->xfrm.state_bydst + h, bydst) {
> > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD) &&
> > + pol->xdo.type == XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET) {
>
> Please try to avoid that check for every state in the list.
> Maybe enable this code with a static key if packet offload
> is used?
I assumed that it will be optimized by compiled because "pol->xdo.type ==
XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET)" is constant here. I'll take a look for more fancy
solutions, but I have serious doubts if they give any benefits.
>
> > + if (x->xso.type != XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET)
> > + /* HW states are in the head of list, there is no need
> > + * to iterate further.
> > + */
> > + break;
> > +
> > + /* Packet offload: both policy and SA should have same device */
> > + if (pol->xdo.dev != x->xso.dev)
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (x->props.family == encap_family &&
> > x->props.reqid == tmpl->reqid &&
> > (mark & x->mark.m) == x->mark.v &&
> > @@ -1132,6 +1145,19 @@ xfrm_state_find(const xfrm_address_t *daddr, const xfrm_address_t *saddr,
> >
> > h_wildcard = xfrm_dst_hash(net, daddr, &saddr_wildcard, tmpl->reqid, encap_family);
> > hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(x, net->xfrm.state_bydst + h_wildcard, bydst) {
> > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD) &&
> > + pol->xdo.type == XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET) {
> > + if (x->xso.type != XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET)
> > + /* HW states are in the head of list, there is no need
> > + * to iterate further.
> > + */
> > + break;
> > +
> > + /* Packet offload: both policy and SA should have same device */
> > + if (pol->xdo.dev != x->xso.dev)
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > if (x->props.family == encap_family &&
> > x->props.reqid == tmpl->reqid &&
> > (mark & x->mark.m) == x->mark.v &&
> > @@ -1185,6 +1211,17 @@ xfrm_state_find(const xfrm_address_t *daddr, const xfrm_address_t *saddr,
> > goto out;
> > }
> >
> > + if (pol->xdo.type == XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET) {
> > + memcpy(&x->xso, &pol->xdo, sizeof(x->xso));
> > + error = pol->xdo.dev->xfrmdev_ops->xdo_dev_state_add(x);
> > + if (error) {
> > + x->km.state = XFRM_STATE_DEAD;
> > + to_put = x;
> > + x = NULL;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > + }
>
> I guess that is to handle acquires, right?
Yes
> What is the idea behind that?
In previous patches, I made sure that policy and SA uses same
struct xfrm_dev_offload and set fields exactly the same.
This line sets all properties::
memcpy(&x->xso, &pol->xdo, sizeof(x->xso));
And .xdo_dev_state_add() gets everything pre-configured.
But yes, it will be different in final patch to make sure that
offload_handle is cleared and dev_tracker is valid.
Thanks
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-25 6:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-09 12:54 [PATCH xfrm-next v7 0/8] Extend XFRM core to allow packet offload configuration Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 1/8] xfrm: add new packet offload flag Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 2/8] xfrm: allow state packet offload mode Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 3/8] xfrm: add an interface to offload policy Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 4/8] xfrm: add TX datapath support for IPsec packet offload mode Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-17 11:59 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-17 12:32 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-18 10:23 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-21 11:10 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 5/8] xfrm: add RX datapath protection " Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 6/8] xfrm: speed-up lookup of HW policies Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-17 12:12 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-17 12:51 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-18 10:49 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-20 19:17 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-21 9:44 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-21 10:27 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-21 11:09 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-21 11:15 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-21 11:25 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-21 11:34 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-21 12:02 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-21 12:43 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-21 13:01 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-22 13:10 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-22 13:57 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-23 8:37 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-23 9:36 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-23 12:53 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-24 11:07 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-25 6:23 ` Leon Romanovsky [this message]
2022-11-21 12:10 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-21 13:21 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-22 4:29 ` Herbert Xu
2022-11-22 6:27 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-22 13:00 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-22 13:54 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-23 8:23 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-23 10:25 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 7/8] xfrm: add support to HW update soft and hard limits Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-17 12:13 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-17 12:32 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-09 12:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 8/8] xfrm: document IPsec packet offload mode Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-17 12:15 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-17 12:33 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-15 18:09 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v7 0/8] Extend XFRM core to allow packet offload configuration Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-15 18:30 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-15 19:00 ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-11-16 23:07 ` Saeed Mahameed
2022-11-17 12:20 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-11-17 12:24 ` Leon Romanovsky
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=Y4Bfc/GuJUumvY7V@unreal \
--to=leon@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.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).