From: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net>
To: David Rheinsberg <david@readahead.eu>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@google.com, haoluo@google.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, daniel@zonque.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, lpm: fix check prefixlen before walking trie
Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2023 21:33:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZUf8Ld8pQu46dyTi@der-flo.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1d237338-6341-45be-9f0e-f1f1a9bdc153@app.fastmail.com>
On Sun, Nov 05, 2023 at 08:08:43PM +0100, David Rheinsberg wrote:
> Hi
>
> On Sun, Nov 5, 2023, at 9:58 AM, Florian Lehner wrote:
> > When looking up an element in LPM trie, the condition 'matchlen ==
> > trie->max_prefixlen' will never return true, if key->prefixlen is larger
> > than trie->max_prefixlen. Consequently all elements in the LPM trie will
> > be visited and no element is returned in the end.
> >
>
> Am I understanding you right that this is an optimization to avoid walking the entire trie? Because the way I read your commit-message I assume the output has always been NULL? Or am I missing something.
>
> Do you have a specific use-case where such lookups are common? Can you explain why it is important to optimize this case? Because you now add a condition for every lookup just to optimize for the lookup-miss of a special case. I don't think I understand your reasoning here, but I might be missing some context.
>
> Thanks!
> David
Hi David,
Your understanding is correct. The return value currently and with this patch is
in both cases the same for the case where key->prefixlen > trie->max_prefixlen.
The optimization is to avoid the locking mechanism, walking the trie and
checking its elements. It might not be the most common use case, so I see your
point.
>
> > Fixes: b95a5c4db09b ("bpf: add a longest prefix match trie map implementation")
> > Signed-off-by: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net>
> > ---
> > kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c | 3 +++
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c b/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c
> > index 17c7e7782a1f..b32be680da6c 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c
> > @@ -231,6 +231,9 @@ static void *trie_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map,
> > void *_key)
> > struct lpm_trie_node *node, *found = NULL;
> > struct bpf_lpm_trie_key *key = _key;
> >
> > + if (key->prefixlen > trie->max_prefixlen)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > /* Start walking the trie from the root node ... */
> >
> > for (node = rcu_dereference_check(trie->root, rcu_read_lock_bh_held());
> > --
> > 2.39.2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-05 20:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-05 8:58 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf, lpm: fix check prefixlen before walking trie Florian Lehner
2023-11-05 19:08 ` David Rheinsberg
2023-11-05 20:33 ` Florian Lehner [this message]
2023-11-06 8:00 ` David Rheinsberg
2023-11-06 20:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=ZUf8Ld8pQu46dyTi@der-flo.net \
--to=dev@der-flo.net \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=daniel@zonque.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=david@readahead.eu \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--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.