Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v5 2/2] net: add netmem to skb_frag_t
From: Mina Almasry <hidden>
Date: 2024-01-12 00:35:09
Also in:
lkml
Subsystem:
networking [general], the rest · Maintainers:
"David S. Miller", Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni, Linus Torvalds
On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 4:45 AM Yunsheng Lin [off-list ref] wrote:
On 2024/1/9 9:14, Mina Almasry wrote: ...quoted
+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!skb_frag_page(&skb_shinfo(skb)->frags[0]))) {I am really hate to bring it up again. If you are not willing to introduce a new helper,
I'm actually more than happy to add a new helper like: static inline netmem_ref skb_frag_netmem(); For future callers to obtain frag->netmem to use the netmem_ref directly. What I'm hung up on is really your follow up request: "Is it possible to introduce something like skb_frag_netmem() for netmem? so that we can keep most existing users of skb_frag_page() unchanged and avoid adding additional checking overhead for existing users." With this patchseries, skb_frag_t no longer has a page pointer inside of it, it only has a netmem_ref. The netmem_ref is currently always a page, but in the future may not be a page. Can you clarify how we keep skb_frag_page() unchanged and without checks? What do you expect skb_frag_page() and its callers to do? We can not assume netmem_ref is always a struct page. I'm happy to implement a change but I need to understand it a bit better.
do you care to use some existing API like skb_frag_address_safe()?
skb_frag_address_safe() checks that the page is mapped. In this case, we are not checking if the frag page is mapped; we would like to make sure that the skb_frag has a page inside of it in the first place. Seems like a different check from skb_frag_address_safe(). In fact, skb_frag_address[_safe]() actually assume that the skb frag is always a page currently, I think I need to squash this fix:
diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
index e59f76151628..bc8b107d0235 100644
--- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
+++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h@@ -3533,7 +3533,9 @@ static inline void skb_frag_unref(struct sk_buff*skb, int f)
*/
static inline void *skb_frag_address(const skb_frag_t *frag)
{
- return page_address(skb_frag_page(frag)) + skb_frag_off(frag);
+ return skb_frag_page(frag) ?
+ page_address(skb_frag_page(frag)) + skb_frag_off(frag) :
+ NULL;
}
/**@@ -3545,7 +3547,14 @@ static inline void *skb_frag_address(constskb_frag_t *frag)
*/
static inline void *skb_frag_address_safe(const skb_frag_t *frag)
{
- void *ptr = page_address(skb_frag_page(frag));
+ struct page *page;
+ void *ptr;
+
+ page = skb_frag_page(frag);
+ if (!page)
+ return NULL;
+
+ ptr = page_address(skb_frag_page(frag));
if (unlikely(!ptr))
return NULL;
quoted
+ ret = -EINVAL; + goto out; + } + iov_iter_bvec(&msg.msg_iter, ITER_SOURCE, - skb_shinfo(skb)->frags, skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags, - msize); + (const struct bio_vec *)skb_shinfo(skb)->frags, + skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags, msize);I think we need to use some built-time checking to ensure some consistency between skb_frag_t and bio_vec.
I can add static_assert() that bio_vec->bv_len & bio_vec->bv_offset are aligned with skb_frag_t->len & skb_frag_t->offset. I can also maybe add a helper skb_frag_bvec() to do the cast instead of doing it at the calling site. That may be a bit cleaner.
quoted
iov_iter_advance(&msg.msg_iter, txm->frag_offset); do {
-- Thanks, Mina