From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@iogearbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
maze@google.com, lmb@cloudflare.com, shaun@tigera.io,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>,
marek@cloudflare.com, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
eyal.birger@gmail.com, brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next V5 4/5] bpf: drop MTU check when doing TC-BPF redirect to ingress
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:46:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201102134658.081fd974@carbon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f9c7935c6991_16d420838@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch>
On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 13:36:05 -0700
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > The use-case for dropping the MTU check when TC-BPF does redirect to
> > ingress, is described by Eyal Birger in email[0]. The summary is the
> > ability to increase packet size (e.g. with IPv6 headers for NAT64) and
> > ingress redirect packet and let normal netstack fragment packet as needed.
> >
> > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CAHsH6Gug-hsLGHQ6N0wtixdOa85LDZ3HNRHVd0opR=19Qo4W4Q@mail.gmail.com/
> >
> > V4:
> > - Keep net_device "up" (IFF_UP) check.
> > - Adjustment to handle bpf_redirect_peer() helper
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/netdevice.h | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > net/core/dev.c | 19 ++-----------------
> > net/core/filter.c | 14 +++++++++++---
> > 3 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > index 964b494b0e8d..bd02ddab8dfe 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > @@ -3891,11 +3891,38 @@ int dev_forward_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb);
> > bool is_skb_forwardable(const struct net_device *dev,
> > const struct sk_buff *skb);
> >
> > +static __always_inline bool __is_skb_forwardable(const struct net_device *dev,
> > + const struct sk_buff *skb,
> > + const bool check_mtu)
>
> It looks like if check_mtu=false then this is just an interface up check.
> Can we leave is_skb_forwardable logic alone and just change the spots where
> this is called with false to something with a name that describes the check,
> such as is_dev_up(dev). I think it will make this change smaller and the
> code easier to read. Did I miss something?
People should realized that this is constructed such, the compiler will
compile-time remove the actual argument (the const bool check_mtu).
And this propagates also to ____dev_forward_skb() where the call places
are also inlined.
Yes, this (check_mtu=false) is basically an interface up check, but the
only place it is used directly is in the ndo_get_peer_dev() case, and
reading the code I find it more readable that is says
__is_skb_forwardable because this is used as part of a forwarding step,
and is_dev_up() doesn't convey the intent in this use-case.
> > +{
> > + const u32 vlan_hdr_len = 4; /* VLAN_HLEN */
> > + unsigned int len;
> > +
> > + if (!(dev->flags & IFF_UP))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + if (!check_mtu)
> > + return true;
> > +
> > + len = dev->mtu + dev->hard_header_len + vlan_hdr_len;
> > + if (skb->len <= len)
> > + return true;
> > +
> > + /* if TSO is enabled, we don't care about the length as the packet
> > + * could be forwarded without being segmented before
> > + */
> > + if (skb_is_gso(skb))
> > + return true;
> > +
> > + return false;
> > +}
> > +
> > static __always_inline int ____dev_forward_skb(struct net_device *dev,
> > - struct sk_buff *skb)
> > + struct sk_buff *skb,
> > + const bool check_mtu)
> > {
>
> I guess you will get some duplication here if you have a dev_forward_skb()
> and a dev_forward_skb_nocheck() or something. Take it or leave it. I know
> I've added my share of bool swivel bits like this, but better to avoid
> it if possible IMO.
As I wrote the bool will actually get compile-time removed, so I don't
see that as problematic. And I avoided replicating the code in more
places.
The problematic part (which you didn't comment) on is this:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2020 17:51:07 +0100
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> index bd4a416bd9ad..71b78b8d443c 100644
> --- a/net/core/filter.c
> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> @@ -2083,13 +2083,21 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_csum_level_proto = {
>
> static inline int __bpf_rx_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
> - return dev_forward_skb(dev, skb);
> + int ret = ____dev_forward_skb(dev, skb, false);
> +
> + if (likely(!ret)) {
> + skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, dev);
> + skb_postpull_rcsum(skb, eth_hdr(skb), ETH_HLEN);
> + ret = netif_rx(skb);
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
> }
I'm replicating two lines from dev_forward_skb(), but I couldn't find a
way to avoid this, without causing larger code changes (and slower code).
> Other than style aspects it looks correct to me.
>
> > if (skb_orphan_frags(skb, GFP_ATOMIC) ||
> > - unlikely(!is_skb_forwardable(dev, skb))) {
> > + unlikely(!__is_skb_forwardable(dev, skb, check_mtu))) {
> > atomic_long_inc(&dev->rx_dropped);
> > kfree_skb(skb);
> > return NET_RX_DROP;
> > diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> > index 9499a414d67e..445ccf92c149 100644
> > --- a/net/core/dev.c
> > +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> > @@ -2188,28 +2188,13 @@ static inline void net_timestamp_set(struct sk_buff *skb)
> >
>
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-02 12:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-30 16:50 [PATCH bpf-next V5 0/5] Subj: bpf: New approach for BPF MTU handling Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-30 16:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next V5 1/5] bpf: Remove MTU check in __bpf_skb_max_len Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-30 16:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next V5 2/5] bpf: bpf_fib_lookup return MTU value as output when looked up Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-30 19:40 ` John Fastabend
2020-11-02 9:28 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-11-02 15:59 ` David Ahern
2020-11-02 16:18 ` John Fastabend
2020-10-31 15:52 ` David Ahern
2020-10-30 16:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next V5 3/5] bpf: add BPF-helper for MTU checking Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-30 20:23 ` John Fastabend
2020-11-02 11:15 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-11-02 18:04 ` John Fastabend
2020-11-02 20:10 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-11-12 12:58 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-30 16:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next V5 4/5] bpf: drop MTU check when doing TC-BPF redirect to ingress Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2020-10-30 20:36 ` John Fastabend
2020-11-02 12:46 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2020-11-02 16:23 ` John Fastabend
2020-10-30 16:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next V5 5/5] bpf: make it possible to identify BPF redirected SKBs Jesper Dangaard Brouer
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=20201102134658.081fd974@carbon \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=borkmann@iogearbox.net \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=eyal.birger@gmail.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lmb@cloudflare.com \
--cc=lorenzo@kernel.org \
--cc=marek@cloudflare.com \
--cc=maze@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shaun@tigera.io \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).