On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 06:50:18PM -0800, John Fastabend wrote:
> On 16-11-29 04:37 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 12:11:33PM -0800, John Fastabend wrote:
> >> virtio_net XDP support expects receive buffers to be contiguous.
> >> If this is not the case we enable a slowpath to allow connectivity
> >> to continue but at a significan performance overhead associated with
> >> linearizing data. To make it painfully aware to users that XDP is
> >> running in a degraded mode we throw an xdp buffer error.
> >>
> >> To linearize packets we allocate a page and copy the segments of
> >> the data, including the header, into it. After this the page can be
> >> handled by XDP code flow as normal.
> >>
> >> Then depending on the return code the page is either freed or sent
> >> to the XDP xmit path. There is no attempt to optimize this path.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.r.fastab...@intel.com>
> > ...
> >> +/* The conditions to enable XDP should preclude the underlying device from
> >> + * sending packets across multiple buffers (num_buf > 1). However per spec
> >> + * it does not appear to be illegal to do so but rather just against
> >> convention.
> >> + * So in order to avoid making a system unresponsive the packets are
> >> pushed
> >> + * into a page and the XDP program is run. This will be extremely slow
> >> and we
> >> + * push a warning to the user to fix this as soon as possible. Fixing
> >> this may
> >> + * require resolving the underlying hardware to determine why multiple
> >> buffers
> >> + * are being received or simply loading the XDP program in the ingress
> >> stack
> >> + * after the skb is built because there is no advantage to running it here
> >> + * anymore.
> >> + */
> > ...
> >> if (num_buf > 1) {
> >> bpf_warn_invalid_xdp_buffer();
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Here is the warn once call. I made it a defined bpf warning so that we
> can easily identify if needed and it can be used by other drivers as
> well.
ahh. I thought it has - in front of it :)
and you're deleting it in this patch.
> >> - goto err_xdp;
> >> +
> >> + /* linearize data for XDP */
> >> + xdp_page = xdp_linearize_page(rq, num_buf,
> >> + page, offset, &len);
> >> + if (!xdp_page)
> >> + goto err_xdp;
> >
> > in case when we're 'lucky' the performance will silently be bad.
>
> Were you specifically worried about the alloc failing here and no
> indication? I was thinking a statistic counter could be added as a
> follow on series to catch this and other such cases in non XDP paths
> if needed.
>
> > Can we do warn_once here? so at least something in dmesg points out
> > that performance is not as expected. Am I reading it correctly that
> > you had to do a special kernel hack to trigger this situation and
> > in all normal cases it's not the case?
> >
>
> Correct the only way to produce this with upstream qemu and Linux is to
> write a kernel hack to build these types of buffers. AFAIK I caught all
> the cases where it could happen otherwise in the setup xdp prog call and
> required user to configure device driver so they can not happen e.g.
> disable LRO, set MTU < PAGE_SIZE, etc.
>
> If I missed anything, I don't see it now, I would call it a bug and fix
> it. Again AFAIK everything should be covered though. As Micheal pointed
> out earlier although unexpected its not strictly against virtio spec to
> build such packets so we should handle it at least in a degraded mode
> even though it is not expected in any qemu cases.
Ok. Makes sense. The above wasn't clear in the commit log.
Thanks
