Re: [PATCH net-next 5/5] netdev-genl: Support setting per-NAPI config values

Joe Damato
2024-09-05T17:05:05Z

On Thu, Sep 05, 2024 at 09:56:43AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 09/05, Joe Damato wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 04:40:41PM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > On 09/02, Joe Damato wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 02:22:35PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2024 11:43:00 +0100 Joe Damato wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 03:31:05PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 13:12:01 +0000 Joe Damato wrote:
> > > > > > > > + doc: Set configurable NAPI instance settings.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We should pause and think here how configuring NAPI params should
> > > > > > > behave. NAPI instances are ephemeral, if you close and open the
> > > > > > > device (or for some drivers change any BPF or ethtool setting)
> > > > > > > the NAPIs may get wiped and recreated, discarding all configuration.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This is not how the sysfs API behaves, the sysfs settings on the device
> > > > > > > survive close. It's (weirdly?) also not how queues behave, because we
> > > > > > > have struct netdev{_rx,}_queue to store stuff persistently. Even tho
> > > > > > > you'd think queues are as ephemeral as NAPIs if not more.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I guess we can either document this, and move on (which may be fine,
> > > > > > > you have more practical experience than me). Or we can add an internal
> > > > > > > concept of a "channel" (which perhaps maybe if you squint is what
> > > > > > > ethtool -l calls NAPIs?) or just "napi_storage" as an array inside
> > > > > > > net_device and store such config there. For simplicity of matching
> > > > > > > config to NAPIs we can assume drivers add NAPI instances in order.
> > > > > > > If driver wants to do something more fancy we can add a variant of
> > > > > > > netif_napi_add() which specifies the channel/storage to use.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thoughts? I may be overly sensitive to the ephemeral thing, maybe
> > > > > > > I work with unfortunate drivers...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for pointing this out. I think this is an important case to
> > > > > > consider. Here's how I'm thinking about it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are two cases:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1) sysfs setting is used by existing/legacy apps: If the NAPIs are
> > > > > > discarded and recreated, the code I added to netif_napi_add_weight
> > > > > > in patch 1 and 3 should take care of that case preserving how sysfs
> > > > > > works today, I believe. I think we are good on this case ?
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed.
> > > > >
> > > > > > 2) apps using netlink to set various custom settings. This seems
> > > > > > like a case where a future extension can be made to add a notifier
> > > > > > for NAPI changes (like the netdevice notifier?).
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, the notifier may help, but it's a bit of a stop gap / fallback.
> > > > >
> > > > > > If you think this is a good idea, then we'd do something like:
> > > > > > 1. Document that the NAPI settings are wiped when NAPIs are wiped
> > > > > > 2. In the future (not part of this series) a NAPI notifier is
> > > > > > added
> > > > > > 3. User apps can then listen for NAPI create/delete events
> > > > > > and update settings when a NAPI is created. It would be
> > > > > > helpful, I think, for user apps to know about NAPI
> > > > > > create/delete events in general because it means NAPI IDs are
> > > > > > changing.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One could argue:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When wiping/recreating a NAPI for an existing HW queue, that HW
> > > > > > queue gets a new NAPI ID associated with it. User apps operating
> > > > > > at this level probably care about NAPI IDs changing (as it affects
> > > > > > epoll busy poll). Since the settings in this series are per-NAPI
> > > > > > (and not per HW queue), the argument could be that user apps need
> > > > > > to setup NAPIs when they are created and settings do not persist
> > > > > > between NAPIs with different IDs even if associated with the same
> > > > > > HW queue.
> > > > >
> > > > > IDK if the fact that NAPI ID gets replaced was intentional in the first
> > > > > place. I would venture a guess that the person who added the IDs was
> > > > > working with NICs which have stable NAPI instances once the device is
> > > > > opened. This is, unfortunately, not universally the case.
> > > > >
> > > > > I just poked at bnxt, mlx5 and fbnic and all of them reallocate NAPIs
> > > > > on an open device. Closer we get to queue API the more dynamic the whole
> > > > > setup will become (read: the more often reconfigurations will happen).
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > > I think you have much more practical experience when it comes to
> > > > > > dealing with drivers, so I am happy to follow your lead on this one,
> > > > > > but assuming drivers will "do a thing" seems mildly scary to me with
> > > > > > limited driver experience.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My two goals with this series are:
> > > > > > 1. Make it possible to set these values per NAPI
> > > > > > 2. Unblock the IRQ suspension series by threading the suspend
> > > > > > parameter through the code path carved in this series
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So, I'm happy to proceed with this series as you prefer whether
> > > > > > that's documentation or "napi_storage"; I think you are probably the
> > > > > > best person to answer this question :)
> > > > >
> > > > > How do you feel about making this configuration opt-in / require driver
> > > > > changes? What I'm thinking is that having the new "netif_napi_add()"
> > > > > variant (or perhaps extending netif_napi_set_irq()) to take an extra
> > > > > "index" parameter would make the whole thing much simpler.
> > > >
> > > > What about extending netif_queue_set_napi instead? That function
> > > > takes a napi and a queue index.
> > > >
> > > > Locally I kinda of hacked up something simple that:
> > > > - Allocates napi_storage in net_device in alloc_netdev_mqs
> > > > - Modifies netif_queue_set_napi to:
> > > > if (napi)
> > > > napi->storage = dev->napi_storage[queue_index];
> > > >
> > > > I think I'm still missing the bit about the
> > > > max(rx_queues,tx_queues), though :(
> > > >
> > > > > Index would basically be an integer 0..n, where n is the number of
> > > > > IRQs configured for the driver. The index of a NAPI instance would
> > > > > likely match the queue ID of the queue the NAPI serves.
> > > >
> > > > Hmmm. I'm hesitant about the "number of IRQs" part. What if there
> > > > are NAPIs for which no IRQ is allocated ~someday~ ?
> > > >
> > > > It seems like (I could totally be wrong) that netif_queue_set_napi
> > > > can be called and work and create the association even without an
> > > > IRQ allocated.
> > > >
> > > > I guess the issue is mostly the queue index question above: combined
> > > > rx/tx vs drivers having different numbers of rx and tx queues.
> > > >
> > > > > We can then allocate an array of "napi_configs" in net_device -
> > > > > like we allocate queues, the array size would be max(num_rx_queue,
> > > > > num_tx_queues). We just need to store a couple of ints so it will
> > > > > be tiny compared to queue structs, anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > The NAPI_SET netlink op can then work based on NAPI index rather
> > > > > than the ephemeral NAPI ID. It can apply the config to all live
> > > > > NAPI instances with that index (of which there really should only
> > > > > be one, unless driver is mid-reconfiguration somehow but even that
> > > > > won't cause issues, we can give multiple instances the same settings)
> > > > > and also store the user config in the array in net_device.
> > > > >
> > > > > When new NAPI instance is associate with a NAPI index it should get
> > > > > all the config associated with that index applied.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts? Does that makes sense, and if so do you think it's an
> > > > > over-complication?
> > > >
> > > > I think what you are proposing seems fine; I'm just working out the
> > > > implementation details and making sure I understand before sending
> > > > another revision.
> > >
> > > What if instead of an extra storage index in UAPI, we make napi_id persistent?
> > > Then we can keep using napi_id as a user-facing number for the configuration.
> > >
> > > Having a stable napi_id would also be super useful for the epoll setup so you
> > > don't have to match old/invalid ids to the new ones on device reset.
> >
> > Up to now for prototyping purposes: the way I've been dealing with this is
> > using a SO_ATTACH_REUSEPORT_CBPF program like this:
> >
> > struct sock_filter code[] = {
> > /* A = skb->queue_mapping */
> > { BPF_LD | BPF_W | BPF_ABS, 0, 0, SKF_AD_OFF + SKF_AD_QUEUE },
> > /* A = A % n */
> > { BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD, 0, 0, n },
> > /* return A */
> > { BPF_RET | BPF_A, 0, 0, 0 },
> > };
> >
> > with SO_BINDTODEVICE. Note that the above uses queue_mapping (not NAPI ID) so
> > even if the NAPI IDs change the filter still distributes connections from the
> > same "queue_mapping" to the same thread.
> >
> > Since epoll busy poll is based on NAPI ID (and not queue_mapping), this will
> > probably cause some issue if the NAPI ID changes because the NAPI ID associated
> > with the epoll context will suddenly change meaning the "old" NAPI won't be
> > busy polled. This might be fine because if that happens the old NAPI is being
> > disabled anyway?
> >
> > At any rate the user program doesn't "need" to do anything when the NAPI ID
> > changes... unless it has a more complicated ebpf program that relies on NAPI ID
> > ;)
>
> Ah, you went a more creative route. We were doing SO_INCOMING_NAPI_ID on
> a single listener and manually adding fds to the appropriate epoll.
> But regardless of the method, having a stable napi_id is still good
> to have and hopefully it's not a lot of work compared to exposing
> extra napi storage id to the userspace.

Yes, your approach makes sense, as well. With a single acceptor
thread I'd also do what you are doing.

I was essentially modifying an existing REUSEPORT user app that one
app listens on all interfaces, so BINDTODEVICE + queue_mapping bpf
filter was the only way (that I could find) to make the NAPI ID
based polling work.