On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 5:52 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kun...@amazon.co.jp> wrote:
>
> From: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com>
> Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 15:54:32 +0100
> > On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 1:50 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kun...@amazon.co.jp>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > The commit 41b14fb8724d ("net: Do not clear the sock TX queue in
> > > sk_set_socket()") removes sk_tx_queue_clear() from sk_set_socket() and
> > > adds
> > > it instead in sk_alloc() and sk_clone_lock() to fix an issue introduced in
> > > the commit e022f0b4a03f ("net: Introduce sk_tx_queue_mapping"). However,
> > > the original commit had already put sk_tx_queue_clear() in
> > > sk_prot_alloc():
> > > the callee of sk_alloc() and sk_clone_lock(). Thus sk_tx_queue_clear() is
> > > called twice in each path currently.
> >
> > Are you sure ?
> >
> > I do not clearly see the sk_tx_queue_clear() call from the cloning part.
> >
> > Please elaborate.
>
> If sk is not NULL in sk_prot_alloc(), sk_tx_queue_clear() is called [1].
> Also the callers of sk_prot_alloc() are only sk_alloc() and sk_clone_lock().
> If they finally return not NULL pointer, sk_tx_queue_clear() is called in
> each function [2][3].
>
> In the cloning part, sock_copy() is called after sk_prot_alloc(), but
> skc_tx_queue_mapping is defined between skc_dontcopy_begin and
> skc_dontcopy_end in struct sock_common [4]. So, sock_copy() does not
> overwrite skc_tx_queue_mapping, and thus we can initialize it in
> sk_prot_alloc().
That is a lot of assumptions.
What guarantees do we have that skc_tx_queue_mapping will never be
moved out of this section ?
AFAIK it was there by accident, for cache locality reasons, that might
change in the future as we add more stuff in socket.
I feel this optimization is risky for future changes, for a code path
that is spending thousands of cycles anyway.
>
> [1] sk_prot_alloc
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/net/core/sock.c#L1693
>
> [2] sk_alloc
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/net/core/sock.c#L1762
>
> [3] sk_clone_lock
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/net/core/sock.c#L1986
>
> [4] struct sock_common
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/net/sock.h#L218-L240
>
>
> > In any case, this seems to be a candidate for net-next, this is not
> > fixing a bug,
> > this would be an optimization at most, and potentially adding a bug.
> >
> > So if you resend this patch, you can mention the old commit in the
> > changelog,
> > but do not add a dubious Fixes: tag
>
> I see.
>
> I will remove the tag and resend this as a net-next candidate.
>
> Thank you,
> Kuniyuki
>
>
> > >
> > > This patch removes the redundant calls of sk_tx_queue_clear() in
> > > sk_alloc()
> > > and sk_clone_lock().
> > >
> > > Fixes: 41b14fb8724d ("net: Do not clear the sock TX queue in
> > > sk_set_socket()")
> > > CC: Tariq Toukan <tar...@mellanox.com>
> > > CC: Boris Pismenny <bor...@mellanox.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kun...@amazon.co.jp>
> > > Reviewed-by: Amit Shah <a...@amazon.de>
> > > ---
> > > net/core/sock.c | 2 --
> > > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
> > > index bbcd4b97eddd..5c665ee14159 100644
> > > --- a/net/core/sock.c
> > > +++ b/net/core/sock.c
> > > @@ -1759,7 +1759,6 @@ struct sock *sk_alloc(struct net *net, int family,
> > > gfp_t priority,
> > > cgroup_sk_alloc(&sk->sk_cgrp_data);
> > > sock_update_classid(&sk->sk_cgrp_data);
> > > sock_update_netprioidx(&sk->sk_cgrp_data);
> > > - sk_tx_queue_clear(sk);
> > > }
> > >
> > > return sk;
> > > @@ -1983,7 +1982,6 @@ struct sock *sk_clone_lock(const struct sock *sk,
> > > const gfp_t priority)
> > > */
> > > sk_refcnt_debug_inc(newsk);
> > > sk_set_socket(newsk, NULL);
> > > - sk_tx_queue_clear(newsk);
> > > RCU_INIT_POINTER(newsk->sk_wq, NULL);
> > >
> > > if (newsk->sk_prot->sockets_allocated)
> > > --
> > > 2.17.2 (Apple Git-113)
> > >
