Re: [PATCH net-next v7] net/core: Introduce netdev_core_stats_inc()
From: Yajun Deng <hidden>
Date: 2023-10-08 08:45:48
Also in:
lkml
On 2023/10/8 15:18, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Sun, Oct 8, 2023 at 9:00 AM Yajun Deng [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 2023/10/8 14:45, Eric Dumazet wrote:quoted
On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 8:34 AM Yajun Deng [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 2023/10/7 13:29, Eric Dumazet wrote:quoted
On Sat, Oct 7, 2023 at 7:06 AM Yajun Deng [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Although there is a kfree_skb_reason() helper function that can be used to find the reason why this skb is dropped, but most callers didn't increase one of rx_dropped, tx_dropped, rx_nohandler and rx_otherhost_dropped....quoted
+ +void netdev_core_stats_inc(struct net_device *dev, u32 offset) +{ + /* This READ_ONCE() pairs with the write in netdev_core_stats_alloc() */ + struct net_device_core_stats __percpu *p = READ_ONCE(dev->core_stats); + unsigned long *field; + + if (unlikely(!p)) + p = netdev_core_stats_alloc(dev); + + if (p) { + field = (unsigned long *)((void *)this_cpu_ptr(p) + offset); + WRITE_ONCE(*field, READ_ONCE(*field) + 1);This is broken... As I explained earlier, dev_core_stats_xxxx(dev) can be called from many different contexts: 1) process contexts, where preemption and migration are allowed. 2) interrupt contexts. Adding WRITE_ONCE()/READ_ONCE() is not solving potential races. I _think_ I already gave you how to deal with this ?Yes, I replied in v6. https://lore.kernel.org/all/e25b5f3c-bd97-56f0-de86-b93a3172870d@linux.dev/ (local)quoted
Please try instead: +void netdev_core_stats_inc(struct net_device *dev, u32 offset) +{ + /* This READ_ONCE() pairs with the write in netdev_core_stats_alloc() */ + struct net_device_core_stats __percpu *p = READ_ONCE(dev->core_stats); + unsigned long __percpu *field; + + if (unlikely(!p)) { + p = netdev_core_stats_alloc(dev); + if (!p) + return; + } + field = (__force unsigned long __percpu *)((__force void *)p + offset); + this_cpu_inc(*field); +}This wouldn't trace anything even the rx_dropped is in increasing. It needs to add an extra operation, such as:I honestly do not know what you are talking about. Have you even tried to change your patch to use field = (__force unsigned long __percpu *)((__force void *)p + offset); this_cpu_inc(*field);Yes, I tested this code. But the following couldn't show anything even if the rx_dropped is increasing. 'sudo python3 /usr/share/bcc/tools/trace netdev_core_stats_inc'Well, I am not sure about this, "bpftrace" worked for me. Make sure your toolchain generates something that looks like what I got: 000000000000ef20 <netdev_core_stats_inc>: ef20: f3 0f 1e fa endbr64 ef24: e8 00 00 00 00 call ef29 <netdev_core_stats_inc+0x9> ef25: R_X86_64_PLT32 __fentry__-0x4 ef29: 55 push %rbp ef2a: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp ef2d: 53 push %rbx ef2e: 89 f3 mov %esi,%ebx ef30: 48 8b 87 f0 01 00 00 mov 0x1f0(%rdi),%rax ef37: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax ef3a: 74 0b je ef47 <netdev_core_stats_inc+0x27> ef3c: 89 d9 mov %ebx,%ecx ef3e: 65 48 ff 04 08 incq %gs:(%rax,%rcx,1) ef43: 5b pop %rbx ef44: 5d pop %rbp ef45: c3 ret ef46: cc int3 ef47: e8 00 00 00 00 call ef4c <netdev_core_stats_inc+0x2c> ef48: R_X86_64_PLT32 .text.unlikely.+0x13c ef4c: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax ef4f: 75 eb jne ef3c <netdev_core_stats_inc+0x1c> ef51: eb f0 jmp ef43 <netdev_core_stats_inc+0x23> ef53: 66 66 66 66 2e 0f 1f data16 data16 data16 cs nopw 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) ef5a: 84 00 00 00 00 00
I'll share some I can see it.
1.
objdump -D vmlinux
ffffffff81b2f170 <netdev_core_stats_inc>:
ffffffff81b2f170: e8 8b ea 55 ff callq ffffffff8108dc00
<__fentry__>
ffffffff81b2f175: 55 push %rbp
ffffffff81b2f176: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
ffffffff81b2f179: 48 83 ec 08 sub $0x8,%rsp
ffffffff81b2f17d: 48 8b 87 e8 01 00 00 mov 0x1e8(%rdi),%rax
ffffffff81b2f184: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax
ffffffff81b2f187: 74 0d je ffffffff81b2f196
<netdev_core_stats_inc+0x26>
ffffffff81b2f189: 89 f6 mov %esi,%esi
ffffffff81b2f18b: 65 48 ff 04 30 incq %gs:(%rax,%rsi,1)
ffffffff81b2f190: c9 leaveq
ffffffff81b2f191: e9 aa 31 6d 00 jmpq ffffffff82202340
<__x86_return_thunk>
ffffffff81b2f196: 89 75 fc mov %esi,-0x4(%rbp)
ffffffff81b2f199: e8 82 ff ff ff callq ffffffff81b2f120
<netdev_core_stats_alloc>
ffffffff81b2f19e: 8b 75 fc mov -0x4(%rbp),%esi
ffffffff81b2f1a1: 48 85 c0 test %rax,%rax
ffffffff81b2f1a4: 75 e3 jne ffffffff81b2f189
<netdev_core_stats_inc+0x19>
ffffffff81b2f1a6: c9 leaveq
ffffffff81b2f1a7: e9 94 31 6d 00 jmpq ffffffff82202340
<__x86_return_thunk>
ffffffff81b2f1ac: 0f 1f 40 00 nopl 0x0(%rax)
2.
sudo cat /proc/kallsyms | grep netdev_core_stats_inc
ffffffff9c72f120 T netdev_core_stats_inc
ffffffff9ca2676c t netdev_core_stats_inc.cold
ffffffff9d5235e0 r __ksymtab_netdev_core_stats_inc
3.
➜ ~ ifconfig enp34s0f0
enp34s0f0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 10.10.30.88 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 10.10.30.255
inet6 fe80::6037:806c:14b6:f1ca prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link>
ether 04:d4:c4:5c:81:42 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 29024 bytes 3118278 (3.1 MB)
RX errors 0 dropped 794 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 16961 bytes 2662290 (2.6 MB)
TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
device interrupt 29 memory 0x39fff4000000-39fff47fffff
➜ ~ ifconfig enp34s0f0
enp34s0f0: flags=4163<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
inet 10.10.30.88 netmask 255.255.255.0 broadcast 10.10.30.255
inet6 fe80::6037:806c:14b6:f1ca prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x20<link>
ether 04:d4:c4:5c:81:42 txqueuelen 1000 (Ethernet)
RX packets 29272 bytes 3148997 (3.1 MB)
RX errors 0 dropped 798 overruns 0 frame 0
TX packets 17098 bytes 2683547 (2.6 MB)
TX errors 0 dropped 0 overruns 0 carrier 0 collisions 0
device interrupt 29 memory 0x39fff4000000-39fff47fffff
The rx_dropped is increasing.
4.
sudo python3 /usr/share/bcc/tools/trace netdev_core_stats_inc
TIME PID TID COMM FUNC
(Empty, I didn't see anything.)
5.
sudo trace-cmd record -p function -l netdev_core_stats_inc
sudo trace-cmd report
(Empty, I didn't see anything.)
If I add a 'pr_info("\n");' like:
+ pr_info("\n");
field = (__force unsigned long __percpu *)((__force void *)p +
offset);
this_cpu_inc(*field);
Everything is OK. The 'pr_info("\n");' can be changed to anything else,
but not
without it.