Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Date:   Thu, 14 Sep 2023 18:49:22 +0200
From:   Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>
To:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
CC:     <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        "Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        "Martin KaFai Lau" <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
        Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
        Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        "KP Singh" <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Allow to use kfunc XDP hints and frags
 together
Message-ID: <ZQM5kt8qHKUH0Iob@lincoln>
References: <20230914083716.57443-1-larysa.zaremba@intel.com>
 <ZQM1BUzcZQtXusA3@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZQM1BUzcZQtXusA3@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?c9hyCL9gOzuxZsm3sc7BXodhsvDSFoJI1NZcFxIJBL/I3/lZ6pniz4e2Eq0r?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?jt0qZNxB/ADhAwqG3OZc2qfCQm23lsu8TyMC/ittmThzc2dDIefblU03lMgK?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?m2Rr+H883Jrt2Asarb2gllLKWZmG2IEGtorezOD9FwQtvlW2+rqAVg/Vamqt?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?0Qisrg0wI9jAZGxjxmSdvPy4xBnhDQpHtVjV766tz630XfJByLG3xwcaTJV0?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?9/V/tkCru/E96w7GYw71RdM/lY49CS7C4zE9gHYNjHqxR6pDFoMS3PIR3MSm?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?/+yGGA1mW+D3LX6ZTSnnspCg+ddlZqo8zCzaTXyu6gOfGLAw3j3o1//oNqJX?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?sFcru+tU5SDwA6e838BpCH/OLZMhssNdqTaPA9a71QgKy1Gza15O5qTEfwPl?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?yNUrwYwWM08i6oDXfna7yctJq+PjdX4vVeNoLouzFu6RQKOGXfIfMXHmMWfx?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?FQGAjvzhzADf5UjJavfugVkf2IlFdO77o9m7cx/0gL8/NOJ2PJnmN5l4a1qp?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?03G3uu9ZjwQxJtaeJEBfFAdgTvw1HrZGrLeALGDlXqTaoK7puw495FYlbL8U?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?/reAfv9GLXifFUbQ6oTgOQP3u1wmzcd42GxYaFtwuHGzAC97NMfHLt/ui4F8?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?SIo3cSC1DLt7lEMzzQy4fpNC2KRvkTYT5HJAlEpy4te0vN6zkpO09KLAIdJX?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?cDnCRiyvWq4RrMX+EGxn+NDgitky1K8JSuTx0H9dMJyGG9pmlznD5IMgCtxq?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6JcrgyTzJW0IkM1ClPr8gSGfAjfBfbX7i/i+JXEDEIIxJ5VgkUZhwluIGVdI?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?wUI4HkxGsSjUVuTOpFe1s+amW8aNTbbvbraRbcvoGvpkRF1Bv45I09PvBLXf?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?KsSUk2tx9/8tsNSngqqikp+NmOWnL+U5ZulyiZNXiG1NMzpttcVyA7Ag7hNh?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?f7Fm/6NLWz4bsB64224tTF1QcGSsNDqdK/SuLIa3yS/Tej1mQttJarM/DZSg?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?RjSm/HypH3K+mAUQXSGFNCCRtoYwnHvtOIJgWZa7Xb37GnxowgdH2bTsEPoj?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?nNJvsLN9k1aQE2GcMX2cb+J69GHU5NQIhqM11HOcNDe4GUreuPalWQdm1sR7?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?YB1Ftp6kzsd/of1IaOU+/YYgAC52pWIDOmNjcmkLpU34CwXJrnxsyYbPxIgV?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?ekS4E6m6MfjzHuAEss/VRzMCdQguKIUmtxKrA4jU5MAEgD6okbpwxHG6nRfX?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?5ldTma5TEGkYkdb47GjQ8rQB9+tS+za7w1Xpf7eXke4hITmV2ofoIZx/dGEN?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?tVzo2Jbl1MwY8T7jN0I2TCh3OfQtPl5waArmalaisJNHyOHWFJ+3rG857qAR?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?rp9f+L0s359BZhllvT3mLqnTfbKEpAqMVy9NpLJ2DRwnpeD0zPsKQMyoIyh2?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6DQfLmoPG5OvGXt0tlw4dGt2K04KtwtQtdzsUUuw3zJWR+hIjvX/BVsGPeDE?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?pQYsiq7RVbpxVANBKHPynY0fGzjSo0ahCK75Drwevs2AW9KEe+1vLi3WC2cW?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?Ocv4C1l4t/36d3y4E1UtxiEQuGu/VGGp3212PkZDWEQ7IQA27MhsfIwhRRAT?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?1g=3D=3D?=
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7677332c-6aa6-4eb1-a29d-08dbb543583b
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: SN7PR11MB7540.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Sep 2023 16:55:05.1585
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: guWO39UdH5rTfDqe9OL0EbznCDIRsDRRwk4yuWde9V9bAY4bZhwuClGwPe6+xvGj01Ee6OEKss+cMDGD+1BxUknxgWzwCZ1nQhYD0OD7rOw=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM8PR11MB5589
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.6.4 (groat.vger.email [0.0.0.0]); Thu, 14 Sep 2023 09:55:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on groat.vger.email

On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 09:29:57AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 09/14, Larysa Zaremba wrote:
> > There is no fundamental reason, why multi-buffer XDP and XDP kfunc RX hints
> > cannot coexist in a single program.
> > 
> > Allow those features to be used together by modifying the flags conditions.
> > 
> > Suggested-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAKH8qBuzgtJj=OKMdsxEkyML36VsAuZpcrsXcyqjdKXSJCBq=Q@mail.gmail.com/
> > Signed-off-by: Larysa Zaremba <larysa.zaremba@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  kernel/bpf/offload.c | 6 +++++-
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/offload.c b/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> > index ee35f33a96d1..43aded96c79b 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/offload.c
> > @@ -232,7 +232,11 @@ int bpf_prog_dev_bound_init(struct bpf_prog *prog, union bpf_attr *attr)
> >  	    attr->prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> >  
> > -	if (attr->prog_flags & ~BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY)
> > +	if (attr->prog_flags & ~(BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY | BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS))
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +
> 
> [..]
> 
> > +	if (attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS &&
> > +	    !(attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY))
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> 
> Any reason we have 'attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS' part here?
> Seems like doing '!(attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY)' should
> be enough, right? We only want to bail out here when BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY
> is not set and we don't really care whether BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS is set
> or not at this point.

If !(attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY) at this point, program could 
be requesting offload.

Now I have thought about those conditions once more and they could be reduced to 
this:

if (attr->prog_flags & ~(BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY) &&
    attr->prog_flags != (BPF_F_XDP_DEV_BOUND_ONLY | BPF_F_XDP_HAS_FRAGS))
	return -EINVAL;

What do you think?