From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
kernel-team@fb.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, memxor@gmail.com,
awerner32@gmail.com, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf v3 03/11] selftests/bpf: fix bpf_loop_bench for new callback verification scheme
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 00:59:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231120225945.11741-4-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231120225945.11741-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>
This is a preparatory change. A follow-up patch "bpf: verify callbacks
as if they are called unknown number of times" changes logic for
callbacks handling. While previously callbacks were verified as a
single function call, new scheme takes into account that callbacks
could be executed unknown number of times.
This has dire implications for bpf_loop_bench:
SEC("fentry/" SYS_PREFIX "sys_getpgid")
int benchmark(void *ctx)
{
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
bpf_loop(nr_loops, empty_callback, NULL, 0);
__sync_add_and_fetch(&hits, nr_loops);
}
return 0;
}
W/o callbacks change verifier sees it as a 1000 calls to
empty_callback(). However, with callbacks change things become
exponential:
- i=0: state exploring empty_callback is scheduled with i=0 (a);
- i=1: state exploring empty_callback is scheduled with i=1;
...
- i=999: state exploring empty_callback is scheduled with i=999;
- state (a) is popped from stack;
- i=1: state exploring empty_callback is scheduled with i=1;
...
Avoid this issue by rewriting outer loop as bpf_loop().
Unfortunately, this adds a function call to a loop at runtime, which
negatively affects performance:
throughput latency
before: 149.919 ± 0.168 M ops/s, 6.670 ns/op
after : 137.040 ± 0.187 M ops/s, 7.297 ns/op
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_loop_bench.c | 13 ++++++++-----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_loop_bench.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_loop_bench.c
index 4ce76eb064c4..d461746fd3c1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_loop_bench.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_loop_bench.c
@@ -15,13 +15,16 @@ static int empty_callback(__u32 index, void *data)
return 0;
}
+static int outer_loop(__u32 index, void *data)
+{
+ bpf_loop(nr_loops, empty_callback, NULL, 0);
+ __sync_add_and_fetch(&hits, nr_loops);
+ return 0;
+}
+
SEC("fentry/" SYS_PREFIX "sys_getpgid")
int benchmark(void *ctx)
{
- for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
- bpf_loop(nr_loops, empty_callback, NULL, 0);
-
- __sync_add_and_fetch(&hits, nr_loops);
- }
+ bpf_loop(1000, outer_loop, NULL, 0);
return 0;
}
--
2.42.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-20 23:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-20 22:59 [PATCH bpf v3 00/11] verify callbacks as if they are called unknown number of times Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 01/11] selftests/bpf: track tcp payload offset as scalar in xdp_synproxy Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 02/11] selftests/bpf: track string payload offset as scalar in strobemeta Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 04/11] bpf: extract __check_reg_arg() utility function Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 05/11] bpf: extract setup_func_entry() " Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 06/11] bpf: verify callbacks as if they are called unknown number of times Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-21 1:00 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-21 1:06 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 07/11] selftests/bpf: tests for iterating callbacks Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 08/11] bpf: widening for callback iterators Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 09/11] selftests/bpf: test widening for iterating callbacks Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 10/11] bpf: keep track of max number of bpf_loop callback iterations Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-21 1:04 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-21 1:09 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-21 1:14 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-21 1:26 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-11-21 1:35 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 22:59 ` [PATCH bpf v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: check if max number of bpf_loop iterations is tracked Eduard Zingerman
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=20231120225945.11741-4-eddyz87@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=awerner32@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.