From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE426C433DF for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:03:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DD120723 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:03:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fb.com header.i=@fb.com header.b="IHBbaAfk"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fb.onmicrosoft.com header.i=@fb.onmicrosoft.com header.b="SyqsH5KT" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732912AbgFWPDa (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 11:03:30 -0400 Received: from mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com ([67.231.145.42]:9010 "EHLO mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732862AbgFWPD3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 11:03:29 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0148461.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 05NEsUei026226; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 08:03:15 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fb.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=facebook; bh=A/VWfeLx8P0NxTEzcQUFMXuMubxuN/xLpwphAm9WASM=; b=IHBbaAfkiTppFMfMUoSDcgjsAVQJnENaYUFsETcDZYUJkEStAr/OhzVMl8Wano1N5O3r /DlTh1zJPOy4IuWJdcsZYuDb/lkc8llc+O+i3Wn9bXCrAzLfDEtM0z2QhPRJxPZ5jNVp VMk/c6AMVIX2kQxSSa3Js2RpblZx6mMm9JY= Received: from maileast.thefacebook.com ([163.114.130.16]) by mx0a-00082601.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 31uk208at8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 23 Jun 2020 08:03:13 -0700 Received: from NAM11-BN8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (100.104.31.183) by o365-in.thefacebook.com (100.104.35.172) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1979.3; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 08:03:12 -0700 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=m++BNDnwVm2Uc+gcv/QnDnRm4BVXKh+VxNFpcydf2yeYQCcFnqRFhakRMdynrTkc6+aRsB18Pom06KSMmMuvig3ImefSV6Q7+DYNadLZQT8mDQ1+Kzj3pjmyNTsd1hYBrKkR/Ama3SBCLPm/mK3YxAfwOe4CRVCIF63zNrE2q/+D0KbKqeFmKs+nLf6P3iKN8l/3+XWsExKQwZ1y0uXSeF6NWEvc0ztPkdt2cU17rBmVXZbPui3K/I61yn5zXCc40wDaeZo1OxoTcSztyq6yie+gawtN1EOCeGQY1R0btXmPziTceF/heGvkJpPoPknx2u9IhHgncPRT3IlnhjW/yA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=A/VWfeLx8P0NxTEzcQUFMXuMubxuN/xLpwphAm9WASM=; b=Judb8gDvmRiQ4Zc8dv2QSKMH6dcdP8qPBjTk9iw3mcDx8q5DxMfVwjrEimh5f1OfhTtYynFBpz2CIfdDgUp1sLprC8OW2pbRkHm2vd2U3vdZoNGGi6SzYqLKQU1zSaaCabXhw+Fqh/Q5rXof4banQSIost+T0x7G2xjLe4VAQoDk0Vc19pyKyg27S/VcrqjlFijl7QaZNGknAzToRTKCIytzx/Gu3GQVzaN4bbyRxlaKPdpbW+awl5ucJ2e3qX3pPafZDkYvv1LB7u3F63nYrtCz4pad+S90Gph913npBWEppw65YGIKBmPzbNWQP+rTVIzT7UMrrA5OkVcF5IdbUA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fb.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=fb.com; dkim=pass header.d=fb.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fb.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-fb-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=A/VWfeLx8P0NxTEzcQUFMXuMubxuN/xLpwphAm9WASM=; b=SyqsH5KTvK0FgIZAogOeQyun0Rr21WPM+2bnDxXv67R0vyKe3DXi4lVOIqDFdimwClbeUumY8X7ViYBMFRqz5QO+rbvbz4GPzPVjsuzlySrq3NnNayaSLw05Mo5LKSD2lh2lsJweikKtba216a7ksqWdZb7YzsALmdbAv/EacCg= Received: from BYAPR15MB4088.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a02:c3::18) by BYAPR15MB2694.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:158::21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3109.23; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:03:11 +0000 Received: from BYAPR15MB4088.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4922:9927:5d6c:5301]) by BYAPR15MB4088.namprd15.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::4922:9927:5d6c:5301%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3109.027; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:03:11 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 13/15] tools/bpf: selftests: implement sample tcp/tcp6 bpf_iter programs To: Andrii Nakryiko CC: bpf , Networking , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Kernel Team , Martin KaFai Lau References: <20200623003626.3072825-1-yhs@fb.com> <20200623003641.3074883-1-yhs@fb.com> From: Yonghong Song Message-ID: <6ff28837-63b1-754d-17aa-fd5877409b64@fb.com> Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2020 08:03:09 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: BYAPR02CA0064.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:54::41) To BYAPR15MB4088.namprd15.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a02:c3::18) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-MessageSentRepresentingType: 1 Received: from [IPv6:2620:10d:c085:21d6::1377] (2620:10d:c090:400::5:7789) by BYAPR02CA0064.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:a03:54::41) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3109.22 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 23 Jun 2020 15:03:10 +0000 X-Originating-IP: [2620:10d:c090:400::5:7789] X-MS-PublicTrafficType: Email X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 4f619d05-1570-42df-e722-08d817868bc4 X-MS-TrafficTypeDiagnostic: BYAPR15MB2694: X-MS-Exchange-Transport-Forked: True X-Microsoft-Antispam-PRVS: X-FB-Source: Internal X-MS-Oob-TLC-OOBClassifiers: OLM:4125; X-Forefront-PRVS: 04433051BF X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck: 1 X-Microsoft-Antispam: BCL:0; X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: 4ZbbH34an9X9Q6wncp8gjXyQekG+6x6d6h3IjLXwh3qE+vzks3GmRLlSsw9GtR5GXtXiqf12nyb5wzWi8KDxd2x7UasjcJySqp7PCVtna6PF4Bd6w4CGMozqvQ395dOOYis6F6HteC4e1coIbFvzMP1LyozQ9fGRy2JvStDmHaIa0wR54v4p8x07ZWWiPDybvNR/wtve0efOVLu8u4a02P+CpwuxCwVB7bkbVrkdvxjRxiYtbDRP9j6kE7k19ERL6D5fKhr2uWPxCRIiGGDMfMsuAK0gop1j+GAHaZ5Uzgb6eoibCkJukpRoFfghlhwlvBkSUekkciKj62OeB7rH/DtoF1AQ0eov4Y+HJriACflm30HltgYV5wDVuoW72EI8 X-Forefront-Antispam-Report: CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:BYAPR15MB4088.namprd15.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFTY:;SFS:(346002)(376002)(39860400002)(396003)(136003)(366004)(8676002)(186003)(5660300002)(86362001)(66556008)(16526019)(66946007)(8936002)(66476007)(2906002)(36756003)(4326008)(31696002)(52116002)(31686004)(53546011)(54906003)(316002)(83380400001)(6916009)(6486002)(2616005)(478600001)(43740500002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102; X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData: 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 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 4f619d05-1570-42df-e722-08d817868bc4 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jun 2020 15:03:11.2498 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 8ae927fe-1255-47a7-a2af-5f3a069daaa2 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: YSFvNzCg2VHEbeKwgbM/gDp9ZmSnybREe9zHrPGbftmHYJCMiK+X+TtY7Z9PESJH X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BYAPR15MB2694 X-OriginatorOrg: fb.com X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.216,18.0.687 definitions=2020-06-23_07:2020-06-23,2020-06-23 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=fb_default_notspam policy=fb_default score=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006120000 definitions=main-2006230117 X-FB-Internal: deliver Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 6/22/20 11:56 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 5:38 PM Yonghong Song wrote: >> >> In my VM, I got identical result compared to /proc/net/{tcp,tcp6}. >> For tcp6: >> $ cat /proc/net/tcp6 >> sl local_address remote_address st tx_queue rx_queue tr tm->when retrnsmt uid timeout inode >> 0: 00000000000000000000000000000000:0016 00000000000000000000000000000000:0000 0A 00000000:00000000 00:00000001 00000000 0 0 17955 1 000000003eb3102e 100 0 0 10 0 >> >> $ cat /sys/fs/bpf/p1 >> sl local_address remote_address st tx_queue rx_queue tr tm->when retrnsmt uid timeout inode >> 0: 00000000000000000000000000000000:0016 00000000000000000000000000000000:0000 0A 00000000:00000000 00:00000000 00000000 0 0 17955 1 000000003eb3102e 100 0 0 10 0 >> >> For tcp: >> $ cat /proc/net/tcp >> sl local_address rem_address st tx_queue rx_queue tr tm->when retrnsmt uid timeout inode >> 0: 00000000:0016 00000000:0000 0A 00000000:00000000 00:00000000 00000000 0 0 2666 1 000000007152e43f 100 0 0 10 0 >> $ cat /sys/fs/bpf/p2 >> sl local_address remote_address st tx_queue rx_queue tr tm->when retrnsmt uid timeout inode >> 1: 00000000:0016 00000000:0000 0A 00000000:00000000 00:00000000 00000000 0 0 2666 1 000000007152e43f 100 0 0 10 0 >> >> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song >> --- > > Looks reasonable, to the extent possible ;) > > Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko > >> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter.h | 15 ++ >> .../selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_tcp4.c | 235 ++++++++++++++++ >> .../selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_tcp6.c | 250 ++++++++++++++++++ >> 3 files changed, 500 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_tcp4.c >> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_tcp6.c >> > > [...] > >> +static int hlist_unhashed_lockless(const struct hlist_node *h) >> +{ >> + return !(h->pprev); >> +} >> + >> +static int timer_pending(const struct timer_list * timer) >> +{ >> + return !hlist_unhashed_lockless(&timer->entry); >> +} >> + >> +extern unsigned CONFIG_HZ __kconfig __weak; > > Why the __weak? We expect to have /proc/kconfig.gz in other tests > anyway? __weak will make CONFIG_HZ to be a zero and you'll get a bunch > of divisions by zero. Make sense. Will change. > >> + >> +#define USER_HZ 100 >> +#define NSEC_PER_SEC 1000000000ULL >> +static clock_t jiffies_to_clock_t(unsigned long x) >> +{ >> + /* The implementation here tailored to a particular >> + * setting of USER_HZ. >> + */ >> + u64 tick_nsec = (NSEC_PER_SEC + CONFIG_HZ/2) / CONFIG_HZ; >> + u64 user_hz_nsec = NSEC_PER_SEC / USER_HZ; >> + >> + if ((tick_nsec % user_hz_nsec) == 0) { >> + if (CONFIG_HZ < USER_HZ) >> + return x * (USER_HZ / CONFIG_HZ); >> + else >> + return x / (CONFIG_HZ / USER_HZ); >> + } >> + return x * tick_nsec/user_hz_nsec; >> +} >> + > > [...] > >> + if (sk_common->skc_family != AF_INET) >> + return 0; >> + >> + tp = bpf_skc_to_tcp_sock(sk_common); >> + if (tp) { >> + return dump_tcp_sock(seq, tp, uid, seq_num); >> + } > > nit: unnecessary {} > >> + >> + tw = bpf_skc_to_tcp_timewait_sock(sk_common); >> + if (tw) >> + return dump_tw_sock(seq, tw, uid, seq_num); >> + >> + req = bpf_skc_to_tcp_request_sock(sk_common); >> + if (req) >> + return dump_req_sock(seq, req, uid, seq_num); >> + >> + return 0; >> +} > > [...] > >> +static int timer_pending(const struct timer_list * timer) >> +{ >> + return !hlist_unhashed_lockless(&timer->entry); >> +} >> + >> +extern unsigned CONFIG_HZ __kconfig __weak; > > same about __weak here > >> + >> +#define USER_HZ 100 >> +#define NSEC_PER_SEC 1000000000ULL >> +static clock_t jiffies_to_clock_t(unsigned long x) >> +{ >> + /* The implementation here tailored to a particular >> + * setting of USER_HZ. >> + */ >> + u64 tick_nsec = (NSEC_PER_SEC + CONFIG_HZ/2) / CONFIG_HZ; >> + u64 user_hz_nsec = NSEC_PER_SEC / USER_HZ; >> + >> + if ((tick_nsec % user_hz_nsec) == 0) { >> + if (CONFIG_HZ < USER_HZ) >> + return x * (USER_HZ / CONFIG_HZ); >> + else >> + return x / (CONFIG_HZ / USER_HZ); >> + } >> + return x * tick_nsec/user_hz_nsec; >> +} > > nit: jiffies_to_clock_t() implementation looks like an overkill for > this use case... Would it be just `x / CONFIG_HZ * NSEC_PER_SEC` with > some potential rounding error? We really want to have the output the same as /proc/net/{tcp,tcp6}. Otherwise, it may cause confusion when comparing bpf_iter_tcp[6] outputs vs. /proc/net/tcp[6] outputs. > >> + >> +static clock_t jiffies_delta_to_clock_t(long delta) >> +{ >> + if (delta <= 0) >> + return 0; >> + >> + return jiffies_to_clock_t(delta); >> +} >> + > > [...] >