From: Yonghong Song <yhs@meta.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
kernel-team@fb.com, KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] bpf: Implement cgroup storage available to non-cgroup-attached bpf progs
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 13:13:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <beae278b-811c-6eee-7361-93e1c019119f@meta.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKH8qBvHJPj6U_dOxH1C4FHJvg9=FE8YZUV3_kc_HJNt1TDuJQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/17/22 11:43 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 11:26 AM Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 11:02 AM <sdf@google.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/13, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>>> Similar to sk/inode/task storage, implement similar cgroup local storage.
>>>
>>>> There already exists a local storage implementation for cgroup-attached
>>>> bpf programs. See map type BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGROUP_STORAGE and helper
>>>> bpf_get_local_storage(). But there are use cases such that non-cgroup
>>>> attached bpf progs wants to access cgroup local storage data. For example,
>>>> tc egress prog has access to sk and cgroup. It is possible to use
>>>> sk local storage to emulate cgroup local storage by storing data in
>>>> socket.
>>>> But this is a waste as it could be lots of sockets belonging to a
>>>> particular
>>>> cgroup. Alternatively, a separate map can be created with cgroup id as
>>>> the key.
>>>> But this will introduce additional overhead to manipulate the new map.
>>>> A cgroup local storage, similar to existing sk/inode/task storage,
>>>> should help for this use case.
>>>
>>>> The life-cycle of storage is managed with the life-cycle of the
>>>> cgroup struct. i.e. the storage is destroyed along with the owning cgroup
>>>> with a callback to the bpf_cgroup_storage_free when cgroup itself
>>>> is deleted.
>>>
>>>> The userspace map operations can be done by using a cgroup fd as a key
>>>> passed to the lookup, update and delete operations.
>>>
>>>
>>> [..]
>>>
>>>> Since map name BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGROUP_STORAGE has been used for old cgroup
>>>> local
>>>> storage support, the new map name BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGROUP_LOCAL_STORAGE is
>>>> used
>>>> for cgroup storage available to non-cgroup-attached bpf programs. The two
>>>> helpers are named as bpf_cgroup_local_storage_get() and
>>>> bpf_cgroup_local_storage_delete().
>>>
>>> Have you considered doing something similar to 7d9c3427894f ("bpf: Make
>>> cgroup storages shared between programs on the same cgroup") where
>>> the map changes its behavior depending on the key size (see key_size checks
>>> in cgroup_storage_map_alloc)? Looks like sizeof(int) for fd still
>>> can be used so we can, in theory, reuse the name..
>>>
>>> Pros:
>>> - no need for a new map name
>>>
>>> Cons:
>>> - existing BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGROUP_STORAGE is already messy; might be not a
>>> good idea to add more stuff to it?
>>>
>>> But, for the very least, should we also extend
>>> Documentation/bpf/map_cgroup_storage.rst to cover the new map? We've
>>> tried to keep some of the important details in there..
>>
>> This might be a long shot, but is it possible to switch completely to
>> this new generic cgroup storage, and for programs that attach to
>> cgroups we can still do lookups/allocations during attachment like we
>> do today? IOW, maintain the current API for cgroup progs but switch it
>> to use this new map type instead.
>>
>> It feels like this map type is more generic and can be a superset of
>> the existing cgroup storage, but I feel like I am missing something.
>
> I feel like the biggest issue is that the existing
> bpf_get_local_storage helper is guaranteed to always return non-null
> and the verifier doesn't require the programs to do null checks on it;
> the new helper might return NULL making all existing programs fail the
> verifier.
Ya, this is indeed the case. Another difference is the new helper
is able to access data from different cgroups. and the old helper
can only access data from *current* cgroup.
>
> There might be something else I don't remember at this point (besides
> that weird per-prog_type that we'd have to emulate as well)..
>
>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> include/linux/bpf.h | 3 +
>>>> include/linux/bpf_types.h | 1 +
>>>> include/linux/cgroup-defs.h | 4 +
>>>> include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 39 +++++
>>>> kernel/bpf/Makefile | 2 +-
>>>> kernel/bpf/bpf_cgroup_storage.c | 280 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 6 +
>>>> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 3 +-
>>>> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 14 +-
>>>> kernel/cgroup/cgroup.c | 4 +
>>>> kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 4 +
>>>> scripts/bpf_doc.py | 2 +
>>>> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 39 +++++
>>>> 13 files changed, 398 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>> create mode 100644 kernel/bpf/bpf_cgroup_storage.c
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-17 20:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-14 4:56 [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] bpf: Implement cgroup local storage available to non-cgroup-attached bpf progs Yonghong Song
2022-10-14 4:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] bpf: Make struct cgroup btf id global Yonghong Song
2022-10-14 4:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] bpf: Implement cgroup storage available to non-cgroup-attached bpf progs Yonghong Song
2022-10-17 18:01 ` sdf
2022-10-17 18:25 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-17 18:43 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-10-17 18:47 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-17 19:07 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-10-17 19:11 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-17 19:26 ` Tejun Heo
2022-10-17 21:07 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-17 21:23 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-17 23:55 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-18 0:47 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-17 22:16 ` sdf
2022-10-18 0:52 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-18 5:59 ` Yonghong Song
2022-10-18 17:08 ` sdf
2022-10-18 17:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-10-18 18:08 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-18 18:11 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-18 18:26 ` Yonghong Song
2022-10-18 23:12 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-10-17 20:15 ` Yonghong Song
2022-10-17 20:18 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-17 20:13 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2022-10-17 20:10 ` Yonghong Song
2022-10-17 20:14 ` Yosry Ahmed
2022-10-17 20:29 ` Yonghong Song
2022-10-17 19:23 ` Yonghong Song
2022-10-17 21:03 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-10-17 22:26 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-10-17 18:16 ` David Vernet
2022-10-17 19:45 ` Yonghong Song
2022-10-14 4:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] libbpf: Support new cgroup local storage Yonghong Song
2022-10-14 4:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpftool: " Yonghong Song
2022-10-17 10:26 ` Quentin Monnet
2022-10-14 4:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: Add selftests for " Yonghong Song
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=beae278b-811c-6eee-7361-93e1c019119f@meta.com \
--to=yhs@meta.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
--cc=yosryahmed@google.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox