On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 09:20:39AM +0300, Vlad Buslov wrote:

On Wed 31 May 2023 at 20:57, Peilin Ye [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

+static inline bool qdisc_is_destroying(const struct Qdisc *qdisc)
+{
+       return qdisc->flags & TCQ_F_DESTROYING;

Hmm, do we need at least some kind of {READ|WRITE}_ONCE() for accessing
flags since they are now used in unlocked filter code path?

Thanks, after taking another look at cls_api.c, I noticed this code in
tc_new_tfilter():

	err = tp->ops->change(net, skb, tp, cl, t->tcm_handle, tca, &fh,
			      flags, extack);
	if (err == 0) {
		tfilter_notify(net, skb, n, tp, block, q, parent, fh,
			       RTM_NEWTFILTER, false, rtnl_held, extack);
		tfilter_put(tp, fh);
		/* q pointer is NULL for shared blocks */
		if (q)
			q->flags &= ~TCQ_F_CAN_BYPASS;
	}               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

TCQ_F_CAN_BYPASS is cleared after e.g. adding a filter to the Qdisc, and it
isn't atomic [1].

We also have this:

  ->dequeue()
    htb_dequeue()
      htb_dequeue_tree()
        qdisc_warn_nonwc():

  void qdisc_warn_nonwc(const char *txt, struct Qdisc *qdisc)
  {
          if (!(qdisc->flags & TCQ_F_WARN_NONWC)) {
                  pr_warn("%s: %s qdisc %X: is non-work-conserving?\n",
                          txt, qdisc->ops->id, qdisc->handle >> 16);
                  qdisc->flags |= TCQ_F_WARN_NONWC;
          }       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  }
  EXPORT_SYMBOL(qdisc_warn_nonwc);

Also non-atomic; isn't it possible for the above 2 underlined statements to
race with each other?  If true, I think we need to change Qdisc::flags to
use atomic bitops, just like what we're doing for Qdisc::state and
::state2.  It feels like a separate TODO, however.

I also thought about adding the new DELETED-REJECT-NEW-FILTERS flag to
::state2, but not sure if it's okay to extend it for our purpose.

Thanks,
Peilin Ye

[1] Compiled to this on my Intel 64:

   0x0000000000017788 <+6472>:	83 62 10 fb        	andl   $0xfffffffb,0x10(%rdx)