Re: [bpf PATCH 2/2] bpf, sockmap: fix incorrect fwd_alloc accounting
From: Cong Wang <hidden>
Date: 2021-03-25 19:28:26
Also in:
bpf
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 7:46 PM John Fastabend [off-list ref] wrote:
Cong Wang wrote:quoted
On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 2:00 PM John Fastabend [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Incorrect accounting fwd_alloc can result in a warning when the socket is torn down,[...]quoted
quoted
To resolve lets only account for sockets on the ingress queue that are still associated with the current socket. On the redirect case we will check memory limits per 6fa9201a89898, but will omit fwd_alloc accounting until skb is actually enqueued. When the skb is sent via skb_send_sock_locked or received with sk_psock_skb_ingress memory will be claimed on psock_other.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^quoted
You mean sk_psock_skb_ingress(), right?Yes.
skb_send_sock_locked() actually allocates its own skb when sending, hence it uses a different skb for memory accounting.
[...]quoted
quoted
@@ -880,12 +876,13 @@ static void sk_psock_strp_read(struct strparser *strp, struct sk_buff *skb) kfree_skb(skb); goto out; } - skb_set_owner_r(skb, sk); prog = READ_ONCE(psock->progs.skb_verdict); if (likely(prog)) { + skb->sk = psock->sk;Why is skb_orphan() not needed here?These come from strparser which do not have skb->sk set.
Hmm, but sk_psock_verdict_recv() passes a clone too, like strparser, so either we need it for both, or not at all. Clones do not have skb->sk, so I think you can remove the one in sk_psock_verdict_recv() too.
quoted
Nit: You can just use 'sk' here, so "skb->sk = sk".Sure that is a bit nicer, will respin with this.quoted
quoted
tcp_skb_bpf_redirect_clear(skb); ret = sk_psock_bpf_run(psock, prog, skb); ret = sk_psock_map_verd(ret, tcp_skb_bpf_redirect_fetch(skb)); + skb->sk = NULL;Why do you want to set it to NULL here?So we don't cause the stack to throw other errors later if we were to call skb_orphan for example. Various places in the skb helpers expect both skb->sk and skb->destructor to be set together and here we are just using it as a mechanism to feed the sk into the BPF program side. The above skb_set_owner_r for example would likely BUG().
Sounds reasonable. Thanks.