From: "Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)" <quic_abchauha@quicinc.com>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Halaney <ahalaney@redhat.com>,
"Martin KaFai Lau" <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
<kernel@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] net: Add additional bit to support clockid_t timestamp type
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2024 18:13:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <79ca7697-339a-4f72-ab12-5a3094b294f3@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6b6bd108-817c-4a58-8b69-6c2dde436575@quicinc.com>
On 4/18/2024 5:30 PM, Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) wrote:
>
>
> On 4/18/2024 2:57 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
>> On 4/18/24 1:10 PM, Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) wrote:
>>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_NET_XGRESS
>>>>> __u8 tc_at_ingress:1; /* See TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK */
>>>>> __u8 tc_skip_classify:1;
>>>>> @@ -1096,10 +1100,12 @@ struct sk_buff {
>>>>> */
>>>>> #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
>>>>> #define SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK (1 << 7)
>>>>> -#define TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK (1 << 6)
>>>>> +#define SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK (1 << 6)
>>>>
>>>> SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_BIT2_MASK?
>>
>> nit. Shorten it to just SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK?
>>
> Okay i will do the same. Noted!
>> #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
>> #define SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK (3 << 6)
>> #define SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_RSH (6) /* more on this later */
>> #else
>> #define SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK (3)
>> #endif
>>
>>>>
>>> I was thinking to keep it as TAI because it will confuse developers. I hope thats okay.
>>
>> I think it is not very useful to distinguish each bit since it is an enum value now. It becomes more like the "pkt_type:3" and its PKT_TYPE_MAX.
>> I see what you are saying.
>>>>> +#define TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK (1 << 5)
>>>>> #else
>>>>> #define SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK (1 << 0)
>>>>> -#define TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK (1 << 1)
>>>>> +#define SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK (1 << 1)
>>>>> +#define TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK (1 << 2)
>>>>> #endif
>>>>> #define SKB_BF_MONO_TC_OFFSET offsetof(struct sk_buff, __mono_tc_offset)
>>>>> @@ -4206,6 +4212,11 @@ static inline void skb_set_delivery_time(struct sk_buff *skb, ktime_t kt,
>>>>> case CLOCK_MONOTONIC:
>>>>> skb->tstamp_type = SKB_CLOCK_MONO;
>>>>> break;
>>>>> + case CLOCK_TAI:
>>>>> + skb->tstamp_type = SKB_CLOCK_TAI;
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> + default:
>>>>> + WARN_ONCE(true, "clockid %d not supported", tstamp_type);
>>>>
>>>> and set to 0 and default tstamp_type?
>>>> Actually thinking about it. I feel if its unsupported just fall back to default is the correct thing. I will take care of this.
>>>>> }
>>>>> }
>>>>
>>>>> >
>>>> @@ -9372,10 +9378,16 @@ static struct bpf_insn *bpf_convert_tstamp_type_read(const struct bpf_insn *si,
>>>>> *insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, tmp_reg, skb_reg,
>>>>> SKB_BF_MONO_TC_OFFSET);
>>>>> *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JSET, tmp_reg,
>>>>> - SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 2);
>>>>> + SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK | SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 2);
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JSET, tmp_reg,
>>>>> + SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 3);
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JSET, tmp_reg,
>>>>> + SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 4);
>>>>> *insn++ = BPF_MOV32_IMM(value_reg, BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_UNSPEC);
>>>>> *insn++ = BPF_JMP_A(1);
>>>>> *insn++ = BPF_MOV32_IMM(value_reg, BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_MONO);
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_JMP_A(1);
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_MOV32_IMM(value_reg, BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_TAI);
>>
>> With SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK defined like above, this could be simplified like this (untested):
>>
> Let me think this through and raise it as part of the next rfc patch.
>> static struct bpf_insn *bpf_convert_tstamp_type_read(const struct bpf_insn *si,
>> struct bpf_insn *insn)
>> {
>> __u8 value_reg = si->dst_reg;
>> __u8 skb_reg = si->src_reg;
>>
>> BUILD_BUG_ON(__SKB_CLOCK_MAX != BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_TAI);
>> *insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, value_reg, skb_reg, SKB_BF_MONO_TC_OFFSET);
>> *insn++ = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, value_reg, SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK);
>> #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
>> *insn++ = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_RSH, value_reg, SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_RSH);
>> #else
>> BUILD_BUG_ON(!(SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK & 0x1));
>> #endif
>>
>> return insn;
>> }
>>
>>>>> return insn;
>>>>> }
>>>>> @@ -9418,10 +9430,26 @@ static struct bpf_insn *bpf_convert_tstamp_read(const struct bpf_prog *prog,
>>>>> __u8 tmp_reg = BPF_REG_AX;
>>>>> *insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, tmp_reg, skb_reg, SKB_BF_MONO_TC_OFFSET);
>>>>> + /*check if all three bits are set*/
>>>>> *insn++ = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, tmp_reg,
>>>>> - TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK);
>>>>> - *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JNE, tmp_reg,
>>>>> - TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 2);
>>>>> + TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK |
>>>>> + SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK);
>>>>> + /*if all 3 bits are set jump 3 instructions and clear the register */
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg,
>>>>> + TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK |
>>>>> + SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 4);
>>>>> + /*Now check Mono is set with ingress mask if so clear */
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg,
>>>>> + TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 3);
>>>>> + /*Now Check tai is set with ingress mask if so clear */
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg,
>>>>> + TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 2);
>>>>> + /*Now Check tai and mono are set if so clear */
>>>>> + *insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg,
>>>>> + SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK |
>>>>> + SKB_TAI_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK, 1);
>>
>> Same as the bpf_convert_tstamp_type_read, this could be simplified with SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK.
>>
Willem and Martin,
When do we clear the tstamp and make it 0 in bpf_convert_tstamp_read? meaning which configuration?
I see previously(current upstream code) if mono_delivery is set and tc_ingress_mask is set
upstream code used to set the tstamp as 0.
Which means with addition of tai mask the new implementation should take care of following cases(correct me if i am wrong)
1. ( tai mask set + ingress mask set ) = Clear tstamp
2. ( mono mask set + ingress mask set ) = Clear tstamp
3. ( mono mask set + tai mask set + ingress mask set ) = Clear tstamp
4. ( No mask set ) = Clear tstamp
5. ( Tai mask set + mono mask set ) = Clear tstamp
This leaves us with only two values which can be support which is 0x1 and 0x2
This means the tstamp_type should be either 0x1(mono) and tstamp_type 0x2 (tai) to set the value_reg with tstamp
Is my understanding correct ?
Do you think the below simplified version looks okay ?
static struct bpf_insn *bpf_convert_tstamp_read(const struct bpf_prog *prog,
const struct bpf_insn *si,
struct bpf_insn *insn)
{
__u8 value_reg = si->dst_reg;
__u8 skb_reg = si->src_reg;
BUILD_BUG_ON(__SKB_CLOCK_MAX != BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_TAI);
#ifdef CONFIG_NET_XGRESS
/* If the tstamp_type is read,
* the bpf prog is aware the tstamp could have delivery time.
* Thus, read skb->tstamp as is if tstamp_type_access is true.
*/
if (!prog->tstamp_type_access) {
/* AX is needed because src_reg and dst_reg could be the same */
__u8 tmp_reg = BPF_REG_AX;
*insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, tmp_reg, skb_reg, SKB_BF_MONO_TC_OFFSET);
/* check if all three bits are set*/
*insn++ = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, tmp_reg,
TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_MASK);
/* If the value of tmp_reg is 7,6,5,4,3,0 which means invalid
* configuration set the tstamp to 0, value 0x1 and 0x2
* is correct configuration
*/
#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
*insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg, 0x1 << SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_RSH, 3);
*insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg, 0x2 << SKB_TSTAMP_TYPE_RSH, 2);
#endif
*insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg, 0x1, 3);
*insn++ = BPF_JMP32_IMM(BPF_JEQ, tmp_reg, 0x2, 2);
#endif
/* skb->tc_at_ingress && skb->tstamp_type:2,
* read 0 as the (rcv) timestamp.
*/
*insn++ = BPF_MOV64_IMM(value_reg, 0);
*insn++ = BPF_JMP_A(1);
}
#endif
*insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, value_reg, skb_reg,
offsetof(struct sk_buff, tstamp));
return insn;
}
>>>>
>>>> This looks as if all JEQ result in "if so clear"?
>>>>
>>>> Is the goal to only do something different for the two bits being 0x1,
>>>> can we have a single test with a two-bit mask, rather than four tests?
>>>>
>>> I think Martin wanted to take care of TAI as well. I will wait for his comment here
>>>
>>> My Goal was to take care of invalid combos which does not hold valid
>>> 1. If all 3 bits are set => invalid combo (Test case written is Insane)
>>> 2. If 2 bits are set (tai+mono)(Test case written is Insane) => this cannot happen (because clock base can only be one in skb)
>>> 3. If 2 bit are set (ingress + tai/mono) => This is existing logic + tai being added (clear tstamp in ingress)
>>> 4. For all other cases go ahead and fill in the tstamp in the dest register.
>>
>> If it is to ensure no new type is added without adding BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_XYZ, I would simplify this runtime bpf insns here and use a BUILD_BUG_ON to catch it at compile time. Something like,
>>
>> enum skb_tstamp_type {
>> SKB_CLOCK_REAL, /* Time base is skb is REALTIME */
>> SKB_CLOCK_MONO, /* Time base is skb is MONOTONIC */
>> SKB_CLOCK_TAI, /* Time base in skb is TAI */
>> __SKB_CLOCK_MAX = SKB_CLOCK_TAI,
>> };
>>
>> /* Same one used in the bpf_convert_tstamp_type_read() above */
>> BUILD_BUG_ON(__SKB_CLOCK_MAX != BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_TAI);
>>
>> Another thing is, the UDP test in test_tc_dtime.c probably needs to be adjusted, the userspace is using the CLOCK_TAI in SO_TXTIME and it is getting forwarded now.
> Noted ! Let me check and evalute this as well.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-20 1:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-18 0:43 [RFC PATCH bpf-next v4 0/2] Replace mono_delivery_time with tstamp_type Abhishek Chauhan
2024-04-18 0:43 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] net: Rename mono_delivery_time to tstamp_type for scalabilty Abhishek Chauhan
2024-04-18 18:47 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-18 19:58 ` Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)
2024-04-18 20:11 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-18 20:38 ` Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)
2024-04-18 20:49 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-18 20:51 ` Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)
2024-04-18 0:43 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] net: Add additional bit to support clockid_t timestamp type Abhishek Chauhan
2024-04-18 19:06 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-18 20:10 ` Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)
2024-04-18 21:57 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2024-04-19 0:30 ` Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)
2024-04-20 1:13 ` Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) [this message]
2024-04-22 18:46 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2024-04-24 18:03 ` Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)
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=79ca7697-339a-4f72-ab12-5a3094b294f3@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_abchauha@quicinc.com \
--cc=ahalaney@redhat.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kernel@quicinc.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).