lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2024]   [Apr]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v1 3/3] net: Add additional bit to support userspace timestamp type
From
On 4/10/24 1:25 PM, Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) wrote:
>>> @@ -830,6 +833,9 @@ enum skb_tstamp_type {
>>> * delivery_time in mono clock base (i.e. EDT). Otherwise, the
>>> * skb->tstamp has the (rcv) timestamp at ingress and
>>> * delivery_time at egress.
>>> + * delivery_time in mono clock base (i.e., EDT) or a clock base chosen
>>> + * by SO_TXTIME. If zero, skb->tstamp has the (rcv) timestamp at
>>> + * ingress.
>>> * @napi_id: id of the NAPI struct this skb came from
>>> * @sender_cpu: (aka @napi_id) source CPU in XPS
>>> * @alloc_cpu: CPU which did the skb allocation.
>>> @@ -960,7 +966,7 @@ struct sk_buff {
>>> /* private: */
>>> __u8 __mono_tc_offset[0];
>>> /* public: */
>>> - __u8 tstamp_type:1; /* See SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK */
>>> + __u8 tstamp_type:2; /* See SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK */
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_NET_XGRESS
>>> __u8 tc_at_ingress:1; /* See TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK */

The above "tstamp_type:2" change shifted the tc_at_ingress bit.
TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK needs to be adjusted.

>>> __u8 tc_skip_classify:1;
>>
>> With pahole, does this have an effect on sk_buff layout?
>>
> I think it does and it also impacts BPF testing. Hence in my cover letter i have mentioned that these
> changes will impact BPF. My level of expertise is very limited to BPF hence the reason for RFC.
> That being said i am actually trying to understand/learn BPF instructions to know things better.
> I think we need to also change the offset SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK and TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK
>
>
> #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN_BITFIELD
> #define SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK (1 << 7) //Suspecting changes here too
> #define TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK (1 << 6) // and here
> #else
> #define SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK (1 << 0)
> #define TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK (1 << 1) (this might have to change to 1<<2 )

This should be (1 << 2) now. Similar adjustment for the big endian.

> #endif
> #define SKB_BF_MONO_TC_OFFSET offsetof(struct sk_buff, __mono_tc_offset)
>
> Also i suspect i change in /selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ctx_rewrite.c

ctx_rewrite.c tests the bpf ctx rewrite code. In this particular case, it tests
the bpf_convert_tstamp_read() and bpf_convert_tstamp_write() generate the
correct bpf instructions.
e.g. "w11 &= 3;" is testing the following in bpf_convert_tstamp_read():
*insn++ = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_AND, tmp_reg,
TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK);

The existing "TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK | SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK" is 0x3
and it should become 0x5 if my hand counts correctly.

The patch set cannot be applied to the bpf-next:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20240409210547.3815806-4-quic_abchauha@quicinc.com/
, so bpf CI cannot run to reproduce the issue.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2024-05-27 16:33    [W:0.066 / U:1.044 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site