From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
To: Alexander H Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
Cc: ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org, hawk@kernel.org,
alexanderduyck@fb.com, linyunsheng@huawei.com,
davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] skbuff: disable coalescing for page_pool fragment recycling
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 13:41:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YkRP7XwvdgFbvGsk@myrica> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2de8c5818582bd9dfe0406541e3326c2bed0b6f2.camel@gmail.com>
On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 08:03:46AM -0700, Alexander H Duyck wrote:
> > (3b) Now while handling TCP, coalesce SKB3 with SKB1:
> >
> > tcp_v4_rcv(SKB3)
> > tcp_try_coalesce(to=SKB1, from=SKB3) // succeeds
> > kfree_skb_partial(SKB3)
> > skb_release_data(SKB3) // drops one dataref
> >
> > SKB1 _____ PAGE1
> > \____
> > SKB2 _____ PAGE2
> > /
> > RX_BD3 _________/
> >
> > In tcp_try_coalesce(), __skb_frag_ref() takes a page reference to
> > PAGE2, where it should instead have increased the page_pool frag
> > reference, pp_frag_count. Without coalescing, when releasing both
> > SKB2 and SKB3, a single reference to PAGE2 would be dropped. Now
> > when releasing SKB1 and SKB2, two references to PAGE2 will be
> > dropped, resulting in underflow.
> >
> > (3c) Drop SKB2:
> >
> > af_packet_rcv(SKB2)
> > consume_skb(SKB2)
> > skb_release_data(SKB2) // drops second dataref
> > page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE2) // drops one pp_frag_count
> >
> > SKB1 _____ PAGE1
> > \____
> > PAGE2
> > /
> > RX_BD3 _________/
> >
> > (4) Userspace calls recvmsg()
> > Copies SKB1 and releases it. Since SKB3 was coalesced with SKB1, we
> > release the SKB3 page as well:
> >
> > tcp_eat_recv_skb(SKB1)
> > skb_release_data(SKB1)
> > page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE1)
> > page_pool_return_skb_page(PAGE2) // drops second pp_frag_count
> >
> > (5) PAGE2 is freed, but the third RX descriptor was still using it!
> > In our case this causes IOMMU faults, but it would silently corrupt
> > memory if the IOMMU was disabled.
> >
> > Prevent coalescing the SKB if it may hold shared page_pool fragment
> > references.
> >
> > Fixes: 53e0961da1c7 ("page_pool: add frag page recycling support in page pool")
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > net/core/skbuff.c | 7 +++++++
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > index 10bde7c6db44..56b45b9f0b4d 100644
> > --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> > +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> > @@ -5276,6 +5276,13 @@ bool skb_try_coalesce(struct sk_buff *to, struct sk_buff *from,
> > if (skb_cloned(to))
> > return false;
> >
> > + /* We don't support taking page_pool frag references at the moment.
> > + * If the SKB is cloned and could have page_pool frag references, don't
> > + * coalesce it.
> > + */
> > + if (skb_cloned(from) && from->pp_recycle)
> > + return false;
> > +
> > /* The page pool signature of struct page will eventually figure out
> > * which pages can be recycled or not but for now let's prohibit slab
> > * allocated and page_pool allocated SKBs from being coalesced.
>
>
> This is close but not quite. Actually now that I think about it we can
> probably alter the block below rather than adding a new one.
>
> The issue is we want only reference counted pages in standard skbs, and
> pp_frag_count pages in pp_recycle skbs. So we already had logic along
> the lines of:
> if (to->pp_recycle != from->pp_recycle)
> return false;
>
> I would say we need to change that because from->pp_recycle is the
> piece that is probably too simplistic. Basically we will get a page
> pool page if from->pp_recycle && !skb_cloned(from). So we can probably
> just tweak the check below to be something along the lines of:
> if (to->pp_recycle != (from->pp_recycle && !skb_cloned(from)))
> return false;
Just to confirm this is fine: the behavior now changes for
to->pp_recycle == 0, from->pp_recycle == 1 and skb_cloned(from) == 1
In this case we now coalesce and take a page ref. So the page has two refs
and two pp_frag_count. (3c) drops one pp_frag_count. If there wasn't
another RX desc holding a pp_frag_count (ie. no step (5)), that would also
drop a page ref, but since 'to' SKB is holding a second page ref the page
is not recycled. That reference gets dropped at (4) and the page is freed
there. With step (5), the page would get recycled into page_pool, but
without (5) the page is discarded.
I guess it works, just want to make sure that it's OK to mix page_pool
pp_frag_count and normal reference counting at the same time.
Thanks,
Jean
>
> That should actually increase the number of cases where we can
> correctly coalesce frames while also addressing the issue you
> discovered as it will only merge cloned skbs into standard skbs instead
> of page pool ones.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-03-30 12:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-03-28 13:22 [PATCH net v2] skbuff: disable coalescing for page_pool fragment recycling Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-03-28 15:03 ` Alexander H Duyck
2022-03-30 12:41 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker [this message]
2022-03-30 15:05 ` Alexander Duyck
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=YkRP7XwvdgFbvGsk@myrica \
--to=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=alexanderduyck@fb.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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