From: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
To: Kamil Zaripov <zaripov-kamil@avride.ai>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Network RX per process per interface statistics
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 10:09:50 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZCHN3sbx2Cr0r0hM@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C8C3B8DB-1CF1-4C51-91A1-6D4C6FEFD6D1@avride.ai>
On 03/27, Kamil Zaripov wrote:
> > By "modifies" - do you mean the payload/headers? You can probably use
> > the skb pointer address as a unique identifier to connect across
> different
> > tracepoints?
> No, I mean when situations when same package through its way to the
> network stack change sk_buff pointer. For example, after skb_clone()
> call. I have made some test and found out (empirically) that pointer to
> the skb->head a much better tracking ID. However, I am not sure that
> there is no other corner cases when skb->head also can change.
Yeah, those are tricky :-(
> > Nothing pops to my mind. But I think that if you store skbaddr=dev from
> > netif_receive_skb, you should be able to look this up at a later point
> > where you know skb->process association?
> Yes, I have already implemented and make some test of this approach: I’m
> listening at netif_receive_skb tracepoint to create skb_head->netif map
> and then listening for __kfree_skb calls to create pid->skb_head map.
> However, this approach have some weaknesses:
> - Part of packages of TCP protocol packages (ACK, for example) are
> handled by the kernel, so I account this packages as kernel activity. But
> almost every TCP ACK package have some associated socket, which, in
> turn, have associated process.
> - I am not sure that all package consumes call __kfree_skb at the end.
> Maybe there is some other miscounting in this place.
> Maybe there is some other approaches to map packages to processes?
I'm not super familiar with those tracing hooks. Maybe you need to
handle consume_skb as well?
If I were to solve something like this, I'd probably look at cgroup/ingress
hooks. Those are guaranteed to run for every incoming packet into cgroup's
sockets. (at least removes that kfree_skb vs consume_skb issue).
But it doesn't solve your problem with the clones...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-27 17:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-24 16:29 Network RX per process per interface statistics Kamil Zaripov
2023-03-24 20:19 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2023-03-27 14:19 ` Kamil Zaripov
2023-03-27 17:09 ` Stanislav Fomichev [this message]
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=ZCHN3sbx2Cr0r0hM@google.com \
--to=sdf@google.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zaripov-kamil@avride.ai \
/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).