Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:44:41 +0000
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
From:   Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>
Cc:     Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@gmail.com>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
        Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
        Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>,
        Yadu Kishore <kyk.segfault@gmail.com>,
        Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Reply-To: Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/3] skbuff: (re)use NAPI skb cache on allocation path
Message-ID: <20210114124406.9049-1-alobakin@pm.me>
In-Reply-To: <CACT4Y+adbmvvbzFnzRZzmpdTipg7ye53uR6OrnU9_K030sfzzA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20210113133523.39205-1-alobakin@pm.me> <20210113133635.39402-1-alobakin@pm.me> <20210113133635.39402-2-alobakin@pm.me> <CANn89i+azKGzpt4LrVVVCQdf82TLOC=dwUjA4NK3ziQHSKvtFw@mail.gmail.com> <20210114114046.7272-1-alobakin@pm.me> <CACT4Y+adbmvvbzFnzRZzmpdTipg7ye53uR6OrnU9_K030sfzzA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

From: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2021 12:47:31 +0100

> On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 12:41 PM Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me> wrote=
:
>>
>> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
>> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:36:05 +0100
>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 2:37 PM Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me> wrot=
e:
>>>>
>>>> Instead of calling kmem_cache_alloc() every time when building a NAPI
>>>> skb, (re)use skbuff_heads from napi_alloc_cache.skb_cache. Previously
>>>> this cache was only used for bulk-freeing skbuff_heads consumed via
>>>> napi_consume_skb() or __kfree_skb_defer().
>>>>
>>>> Typical path is:
>>>>  - skb is queued for freeing from driver or stack, its skbuff_head
>>>>    goes into the cache instead of immediate freeing;
>>>>  - driver or stack requests NAPI skb allocation, an skbuff_head is
>>>>    taken from the cache instead of allocation.
>>>>
>>>> Corner cases:
>>>>  - if it's empty on skb allocation, bulk-allocate the first half;
>>>>  - if it's full on skb consuming, bulk-wipe the second half.
>>>>
>>>> Also try to balance its size after completing network softirqs
>>>> (__kfree_skb_flush()).
>>>
>>> I do not see the point of doing this rebalance (especially if we do not=
 change
>>> its name describing its purpose more accurately).
>>>
>>> For moderate load, we will have a reduced bulk size (typically one or t=
wo).
>>> Number of skbs in the cache is in [0, 64[ , there is really no risk of
>>> letting skbs there for a long period of time.
>>> (32 * sizeof(sk_buff) =3D 8192)
>>> I would personally get rid of this function completely.
>>
>> When I had a cache of 128 entries, I had worse results without this
>> function. But seems like I forgot to retest when I switched to the
>> original size of 64.
>> I also thought about removing this function entirely, will test.
>>
>>> Also it seems you missed my KASAN support request ?
>>  I guess this is a matter of using kasan_unpoison_range(), we can ask fo=
r help.
>>
>> I saw your request, but don't see a reason for doing this.
>> We are not caching already freed skbuff_heads. They don't get
>> kmem_cache_freed before getting into local cache. KASAN poisons
>> them no earlier than at kmem_cache_free() (or did I miss someting?).
>> heads being cached just get rid of all references and at the moment
>> of dropping to the cache they are pretty the same as if they were
>> allocated.
>
> KASAN should not report false positives in this case.
> But I think Eric meant preventing false negatives. If we kmalloc 17
> bytes, KASAN will detect out-of-bounds accesses beyond these 17 bytes.
> But we put that data into 128-byte blocks, KASAN will miss
> out-of-bounds accesses beyond 17 bytes up to 128 bytes.
> The same holds for "logical" use-after-frees when object is free, but
> not freed into slab.
>
> An important custom cache should use annotations like
> kasan_poison_object_data/kasan_unpoison_range.

As I understand, I should
kasan_poison_object_data(skbuff_head_cache, skb) and then
kasan_unpoison_range(skb, sizeof(*skb)) when putting it into the
cache?

Thanks,
Al