Netdev Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, <linuxarm@openeuler.org>,
	<yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>, Salil Mehta <salil.mehta@huawei.com>,
	<thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>, <mw@semihalf.com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	<hawk@kernel.org>,
	"Ilias Apalodimas" <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	"Matthew Wilcox" <willy@infradead.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
	<guro@fb.com>, <peterx@redhat.com>,
	Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
	<mcroce@microsoft.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
	Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@gmail.com>,
	Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>,
	"Willem de Bruijn" <willemb@google.com>, <wenxu@ucloud.cn>,
	<cong.wang@bytedance.com>, Kevin Hao <haokexin@gmail.com>,
	<nogikh@google.com>, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
	Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC 1/2] page_pool: add page recycling support based on elevated refcnt
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 11:05:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <29403911-bc26-dd86-83b8-da3c1784d087@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKgT0Ueyc8BqjkdTVC_c-Upn-ghNeahYQrWJtQSqxoqN7VvMWA@mail.gmail.com>

On 2021/7/7 4:45, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2021 at 2:19 AM Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>> Currently page pool only support page recycling only when
>> refcnt of page is one, which means it can not support the
>> split page recycling implemented in the most ethernet driver.
>>
>> So add elevated refcnt support in page pool, and support
>> allocating page frag to enable multi-frames-per-page based
>> on the elevated refcnt support.
>>
>> As the elevated refcnt is per page, and there is no space
>> for that in "struct page" now, so add a dynamically allocated
>> "struct page_pool_info" to record page pool ptr and refcnt
>> corrsponding to a page for now. Later, we can recycle the
>> "struct page_pool_info" too, or use part of page memory to
>> record pp_info.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>

Hi, Alexander

Thanks for detailed reviewing.

> 
> So this isn't going to work with the current recycling logic. The
> expectation there is that we can safely unmap the entire page as soon
> as the reference count is greater than 1.

Yes, the expectation is changed to we can always recycle the page
when the last user has dropped the refcnt that has given to it when
the page is not pfmemalloced.

The above expectation is based on that the last user will always
call page_pool_put_full_page() in order to do the recycling or do
the resource cleanup(dma unmaping..etc).

As the skb_free_head() and skb_release_data() have both checked the
skb->pp_recycle to call the page_pool_put_full_page() if needed, I
think we are safe for most case, the one case I am not so sure above
is the rx zero copy, which seems to also bump up the refcnt before
mapping the page to user space, we might need to ensure rx zero copy
is not the last user of the page or if it is the last user, make sure
it calls page_pool_put_full_page() too.


> 
> In addition I think I need to look over that code better as I am
> wondering if there are potential issues assuming a path such as a
> skb_clone followed by pskb_expand_head may lead to memory corruptions
> since the clone will still have pp_recycle set but none of the pages
> will be part of the page pool anymore.

There is still page->pp_magic that decides if the page is from
page_pool or not.

> 
> For us the pagecnt_bias would really represent the number of
> additional mappings beyond the current page that are being held. I
> have already been playing around with something similar. However the
> general idea is that we want to keep track of how many references to
> the page the device is holding onto. When that hits 0 and the actual
> page count is 1 we can refill both, however if we hit 0 and there are
> multiple references to the page still floating around we should just
> unmap the page and turn it over to the stack or free it.

I am not sure I understood the above.

As page reusing in hns3 driver, pagecnt_bias means how many refcnt the
driver is holding, and (page_count(cb->priv) - pagecnt_bias) means how
many refcnt the stack is holding, see [1].

static bool hns3_can_reuse_page(struct hns3_desc_cb *cb)
{
	return (page_count(cb->priv) - cb->pagecnt_bias) == 1;
}

checking (page_count(cb->priv) - cb->pagecnt_bias) again one instead
of zero is in hns3_can_reuse_page because there is "pagecnt_bias--"
before checking hns3_can_reuse_page() in hns3_nic_reuse_page().

"pagecnt_bias--" means the driver gives the one of its refcnt to the
stack, it is the stack'job to release the refcnt when the skb is passed
to the stack.

1. https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/drivers/net/ethernet/hisilicon/hns3/hns3_enet.c#L2870

> 
>> ---
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c           |   6 +-
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c |   2 +-
>>  include/linux/mm_types.h                        |   2 +-
>>  include/linux/skbuff.h                          |   4 +-
>>  include/net/page_pool.h                         |  30 +++-
>>  net/core/page_pool.c                            | 215 ++++++++++++++++++++----
>>  6 files changed, 207 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c
>> index 88a7550..5a29af2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c
>> @@ -2327,7 +2327,7 @@ mvneta_swbm_build_skb(struct mvneta_port *pp, struct page_pool *pool,
>>         if (!skb)
>>                 return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>>
>> -       skb_mark_for_recycle(skb, virt_to_page(xdp->data), pool);
>> +       skb_mark_for_recycle(skb);
>>
>>         skb_reserve(skb, xdp->data - xdp->data_hard_start);
>>         skb_put(skb, xdp->data_end - xdp->data);
>> @@ -2339,10 +2339,6 @@ mvneta_swbm_build_skb(struct mvneta_port *pp, struct page_pool *pool,
>>                 skb_add_rx_frag(skb, skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frags,
>>                                 skb_frag_page(frag), skb_frag_off(frag),
>>                                 skb_frag_size(frag), PAGE_SIZE);
>> -               /* We don't need to reset pp_recycle here. It's already set, so
>> -                * just mark fragments for recycling.
>> -                */
>> -               page_pool_store_mem_info(skb_frag_page(frag), pool);
>>         }
>>
>>         return skb;
> 
> So as I mentioned earlier the problem with recycling is that splitting
> up the ownership of the page makes it difficult for us to clean it up.
> Technically speaking if the pages are being allowed to leave while
> holding references to DMA addresses that we cannot revoke then we
> should be holding references to the device.
> 
> That is one of the reasons why the previous code was just clearing the
> mapping as soon as the refcount was greater than 1. However for this
> to work out correctly we would have to track how many DMA mappings we
> have outstanding in addition to the one we are working on currently.

I think page pool has already handled the above case if I understand
correctly, see page_pool_release().

> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c
>> index 3135220..540e387 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c
>> @@ -3997,7 +3997,7 @@ static int mvpp2_rx(struct mvpp2_port *port, struct napi_struct *napi,
>>                 }
>>
>>                 if (pp)
>> -                       skb_mark_for_recycle(skb, page, pp);
>> +                       skb_mark_for_recycle(skb);
>>                 else
>>                         dma_unmap_single_attrs(dev->dev.parent, dma_addr,
>>                                                bm_pool->buf_size, DMA_FROM_DEVICE,
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm_types.h b/include/linux/mm_types.h
>> index 862f88a..cf613df 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mm_types.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mm_types.h
>> @@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ struct page {
>>                          * page_pool allocated pages.
>>                          */
>>                         unsigned long pp_magic;
>> -                       struct page_pool *pp;
>> +                       struct page_pool_info *pp_info;
>>                         unsigned long _pp_mapping_pad;
>>                         /**
>>                          * @dma_addr: might require a 64-bit value on
> 
> So the problem here is that this is creating a pointer chase, and the
> need to allocate yet another structure to store it is going to be
> expensive.
> 
> As far as storing the pagecnt_bias it might make more sense to
> repurpose the lower 12 bits of the dma address. A DMA mapping should
> be page aligned anyway so the lower 12 bits would be reserved 0. When
> we decrement the value so that the lower 12 bits are 0 we should be
> unmapping the page anyway, or resetting the pagecnt_bias to PAGE_SIZE
> - 1 and adding back the bias to the page to effectively reset it for
> reuse.

Yes, that is a great idea. I like it very much supposing page refcnt
updating batching for 'PAGE_SIZE - 1" is enough for performance sake.

Will take a look about it.

> 
>> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
>> index b2db9cd..7795979 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
>> @@ -4711,11 +4711,9 @@ static inline u64 skb_get_kcov_handle(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>  }
>>
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL
>> -static inline void skb_mark_for_recycle(struct sk_buff *skb, struct page *page,
>> -                                       struct page_pool *pp)
>> +static inline void skb_mark_for_recycle(struct sk_buff *skb)
>>  {
>>         skb->pp_recycle = 1;
>> -       page_pool_store_mem_info(page, pp);
>>  }
>>  #endif
> 
> I am not a fan of the pp_recycle flag either. We duplicate it via
> skb_clone and from what I can tell if we call pskb_expand_head
> afterwards I don't see how we avoid recycling the page frags twice.

Acctually skb->pp_recycle is kind of duplicated, as there is
still page->pp_magic to avoid recycling the page frags twice.

The argument above adding skb->pp_recycle seems to be short
cut code path for non-page_pool case in the previous disscusion,
see [2].

2. https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/074b0d1d-9531-57f3-8e0e-a447387478d1@huawei.com/

> 
>> diff --git a/include/net/page_pool.h b/include/net/page_pool.h
>> index 3dd62dd..44e7545 100644
>> --- a/include/net/page_pool.h
>> +++ b/include/net/page_pool.h
>> @@ -45,7 +45,9 @@
>>                                         * Please note DMA-sync-for-CPU is still
>>                                         * device driver responsibility
>>                                         */
>> -#define PP_FLAG_ALL            (PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP | PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV)
>> +#define PP_FLAG_PAGECNT_BIAS   BIT(2)  /* Enable elevated refcnt */
>> +#define PP_FLAG_ALL            (PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP | PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV |\
>> +                                PP_FLAG_PAGECNT_BIAS)
>>
>>  /*
> 
> It might be better to just put each flag on a seperate line for
> PP_FLAG_ALL just to make it easier to read due to the wrapping. Either
> that or you could look at converting this over to an enum with a MAX
> value and then define the flags based on those enums, and PP_FLAG_ALL
> being BIT(MAX) - 1.

Will do the wrapping first:)

> 
>>   * Fast allocation side cache array/stack
>> @@ -77,6 +79,7 @@ struct page_pool_params {
>>         enum dma_data_direction dma_dir; /* DMA mapping direction */
>>         unsigned int    max_len; /* max DMA sync memory size */
>>         unsigned int    offset;  /* DMA addr offset */
>> +       unsigned int    frag_size;
>>  };
>>
>>  struct page_pool {
>> @@ -88,6 +91,8 @@ struct page_pool {
>>         unsigned long defer_warn;
>>
>>         u32 pages_state_hold_cnt;
>> +       unsigned int frag_offset;
>> +       struct page *frag_page;
>>
>>         /*
>>          * Data structure for allocation side
>> @@ -128,6 +133,11 @@ struct page_pool {
>>         u64 destroy_cnt;
>>  };
>>
>> +struct page_pool_info {
>> +       struct page_pool *pp;
>> +       int pagecnt_bias;
>> +};
>> +
> 
> Rather than having a top-down structure here it might be better to
> work bottom up. If you assume you are keeping a pagecnt_bias per page
> it might make more sense to store this in the driver somewhere rather
> than having it as a separate allocated buffer. One advantage of the
> Intel drivers was doing this as we had the pagecnt_bias in a structure
> that also pointed to the page. That way we were only updating that
> count if we dropped the page and didn't have to even touch the page.
> You could use that to batch updates to the pagecnt_bias if we did use
> the lower 12 bits of the DMA address to store it as well.

I am not sure I understood what "we dropped the page" meant.
The driver does not really need to call page_pool_put_full_page()
if the page of a skb is passed to stack, the driver mainly call
page_pool_put_full_page() when unloading or uniniting when the page
is not passed to stack yet.


> I'm assuming the idea with this is that you will be having multiple
> buffers received off of a single page and so doing it that way you
> should only have one update on allocation, maybe a trickle of updates
> for XDP_TX, and another large update when the page is fully consumed
> and you drop the remaining pagecnt_bias for Rx.

I suppose "having multiple buffers received off of a single page" mean:
use first half of a page for a desc, and the second half of the same page
for another desc, intead of ping-pong way of reusing implemented in most
driver currently?

I am not so familiar with XDP to understand the latter part of comment too.

> 
>>  struct page *page_pool_alloc_pages(struct page_pool *pool, gfp_t gfp);
>>
>>  static inline struct page *page_pool_dev_alloc_pages(struct page_pool *pool)
>> @@ -137,6 +147,17 @@ static inline struct page *page_pool_dev_alloc_pages(struct page_pool *pool)
>>         return page_pool_alloc_pages(pool, gfp);
>>  }
>>
>> +struct page *page_pool_alloc_frag(struct page_pool *pool,
>> +                                 unsigned int *offset, gfp_t gfp);
>> +
>> +static inline struct page *page_pool_dev_alloc_frag(struct page_pool *pool,
>> +                                                   unsigned int *offset)
>> +{
>> +       gfp_t gfp = (GFP_ATOMIC | __GFP_NOWARN);
>> +
>> +       return page_pool_alloc_frag(pool, offset, gfp);
>> +}
>> +
>>  /* get the stored dma direction. A driver might decide to treat this locally and
>>   * avoid the extra cache line from page_pool to determine the direction
>>   */
>> @@ -253,11 +274,4 @@ static inline void page_pool_ring_unlock(struct page_pool *pool)
>>                 spin_unlock_bh(&pool->ring.producer_lock);
>>  }
>>
>> -/* Store mem_info on struct page and use it while recycling skb frags */
>> -static inline
>> -void page_pool_store_mem_info(struct page *page, struct page_pool *pp)
>> -{
>> -       page->pp = pp;
>> -}
>> -
>>  #endif /* _NET_PAGE_POOL_H */
> 
> So the issue as I see it with the page_pool recycling patch set is
> that I don't think we had proper guarantees in place that the page->pp
> value was flushed in all cases where skb->dev was changed. Basically
> the logic we need to have in place to address those issues is that
> skb->dev is changed we need to invalidate the DMA mappings on the
> page_pool page.

The DMA mappings invalidating is based on the pool->p.dev, is there
any reason why the DMA mappings need invalidating when skb->dev is
change, as fast I can tell, the tx is not aware of page pool, so
when the skb is redirected, the page of the skb is always DMA mapped
according to skb->dev before xmitting.

Or it is about XDP redirected?

Is there something obvious I missed here?

> 
> I honestly wonder if it wouldn't be better for the recycling to just
> make use of the page->lru pointers to keep a list of pages that are
> outstanding so that it could release them if it is under DMA pressure.
> 
>> diff --git a/net/core/page_pool.c b/net/core/page_pool.c
>> index 5e4eb45..95d94a7 100644
>> --- a/net/core/page_pool.c
>> +++ b/net/core/page_pool.c
>> @@ -206,6 +206,49 @@ static bool page_pool_dma_map(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
>>         return true;
>>  }
>>
>> +static int page_pool_set_pp_info(struct page_pool *pool,
>> +                                struct page *page, gfp_t gfp)
>> +{
>> +       struct page_pool_info *pp_info;
>> +
>> +       pp_info = kzalloc_node(sizeof(*pp_info), gfp, pool->p.nid);
>> +       if (!pp_info)
>> +               return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +       if (pool->p.flags & PP_FLAG_PAGECNT_BIAS) {
>> +               page_ref_add(page, USHRT_MAX);
>> +               pp_info->pagecnt_bias = USHRT_MAX;
>> +       } else {
>> +               pp_info->pagecnt_bias = 0;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       page->pp_magic |= PP_SIGNATURE;
>> +       pp_info->pp = pool;
>> +       page->pp_info = pp_info;
>> +       return 0;
>> +}
>> +
> 
> Having to perform a kzalloc in this path pretty much ruins the whole
> point of the page_pool API in my opinion. We would be much better off
> having a static structure that is to be maintained somewhere rather
> than doing this dynamically as you would just make a memory hog able
> to hold that much more memory.

Let's see if repurposing the lower 12 bits of the dma address make sense?

> 
>> +static int page_pool_clear_pp_info(struct page *page)
>> +{
>> +       struct page_pool_info *pp_info = page->pp_info;
>> +       int bias;
>> +
>> +       bias = pp_info->pagecnt_bias;
>> +
>> +       kfree(pp_info);
>> +       page->pp_info = NULL;
>> +       page->pp_magic = 0;
>> +
>> +       return bias;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void page_pool_clear_and_drain_page(struct page *page)
>> +{
>> +       int bias = page_pool_clear_pp_info(page);
>> +
>> +       __page_frag_cache_drain(page, bias + 1);
>> +}
>> +
>>  static struct page *__page_pool_alloc_page_order(struct page_pool *pool,
>>                                                  gfp_t gfp)
>>  {
>> @@ -216,13 +259,16 @@ static struct page *__page_pool_alloc_page_order(struct page_pool *pool,
>>         if (unlikely(!page))
>>                 return NULL;
>>
>> -       if ((pool->p.flags & PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP) &&
>> -           unlikely(!page_pool_dma_map(pool, page))) {
>> +       if (unlikely(page_pool_set_pp_info(pool, page, gfp))) {
>>                 put_page(page);
>>                 return NULL;
>>         }
>>
>> -       page->pp_magic |= PP_SIGNATURE;
>> +       if ((pool->p.flags & PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP) &&
>> +           unlikely(!page_pool_dma_map(pool, page))) {
>> +               page_pool_clear_and_drain_page(page);
>> +               return NULL;
>> +       }
>>
>>         /* Track how many pages are held 'in-flight' */
>>         pool->pages_state_hold_cnt++;
>> @@ -261,12 +307,17 @@ static struct page *__page_pool_alloc_pages_slow(struct page_pool *pool,
>>          */
>>         for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) {
>>                 page = pool->alloc.cache[i];
>> +               if (unlikely(page_pool_set_pp_info(pool, page, gfp))) {
>> +                       put_page(page);
>> +                       continue;
>> +               }
>> +
>>                 if ((pp_flags & PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP) &&
>>                     unlikely(!page_pool_dma_map(pool, page))) {
>> -                       put_page(page);
>> +                       page_pool_clear_and_drain_page(page);
>>                         continue;
>>                 }
> 
> This seems backwards to me. I would have the pp_info populated after
> you have generated the DMA mapping.

Ok.

> 
>> -               page->pp_magic |= PP_SIGNATURE;
>> +
>>                 pool->alloc.cache[pool->alloc.count++] = page;
>>                 /* Track how many pages are held 'in-flight' */
>>                 pool->pages_state_hold_cnt++;
>> @@ -284,6 +335,25 @@ static struct page *__page_pool_alloc_pages_slow(struct page_pool *pool,
>>         return page;
>>  }
>>
>> +static void page_pool_sub_bias(struct page *page, int nr)
>> +{
>> +       struct page_pool_info *pp_info = page->pp_info;
>> +
>> +       /* "pp_info->pagecnt_bias == 0" indicates the PAGECNT_BIAS
>> +        * flags is not set.
>> +        */
>> +       if (!pp_info->pagecnt_bias)
>> +               return;
>> +
>> +       /* Make sure pagecnt_bias > 0 for elevated refcnt case */
>> +       if (unlikely(pp_info->pagecnt_bias <= nr)) {
>> +               page_ref_add(page, USHRT_MAX);
>> +               pp_info->pagecnt_bias += USHRT_MAX;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       pp_info->pagecnt_bias -= nr;
> 
> So we should never have a case where pagecnt_bias is less than the
> value we are subtracting. If we have that then it is a bug.

Yes.

> 
> The general idea with the pagecnt_bias is that we want to batch the
> release of the page from the device. So the assumption is we are going
> to pull multiple references from the page and rather than doing
> page_ref_inc repeatedly we want to batch it at the start, and we have
> to perform a __page_frag_cache_drain to remove any unused references
> when we need to free it.

Yes, it is about batching the page_ref_inc() operation.

> 
> What we should probably be checking for is "pp_info->pagecnt_bias -
> page_count(page) > 1" when we hit the end of the page. If that is true
> then we cannot recycle the page and so when we hit PAGE_SIZE for the
> offset we have to drop the mapping and free the page subtracting any
> remaining pagecnt_bias we are holding. If I recall I actually ran this
> the other way and ran toward 0 in my implementation before as that
> allows for not having to track via a value and instead simply checking
> for a signed result.


When allocating a page for frag, we have decided how many user is using
the page, that is the "page_pool_sub_bias(frag_page, max_len / frag_size - 1)"
in page_pool_alloc_frag().

so it is up to the driver or stack to do multi page_pool_put_full_page()
calling for the same page.
Or the page pool will call page_pool_put_full_page() in page_pool_empty_frag()
if some of the page frag is not allocated to the driver yet.

It seems you are suggesting a slightly different way to do frag reusing.

> 
>> +}
>> +
>>  /* For using page_pool replace: alloc_pages() API calls, but provide
>>   * synchronization guarantee for allocation side.
>>   */
>> @@ -293,15 +363,66 @@ struct page *page_pool_alloc_pages(struct page_pool *pool, gfp_t gfp)
>>
>>         /* Fast-path: Get a page from cache */
>>         page = __page_pool_get_cached(pool);
>> -       if (page)
>> +       if (page) {
>> +               page_pool_sub_bias(page, 1);
>>                 return page;
>> +       }
> 
> I'm not sure we should be subtracting from the bias here. Ideally if
> you are getting a page you are getting the full 4K page. So having a
> bias other than PAGE_SIZE - 1 wouldn't make much sense here.

It seems we have different understanding about pagecnt_bias here,
as the pagecnt_bias is hidden in the page pool now, the subtracting
here mean we give one refcnt to the caller of page_pool_alloc_pages(),
And in page_pool_alloc_frag(), we give different part of page to the
driver, so it means more user too, so there is also subtracting in the
page_pool_alloc_frag() too.

> 
>>
>>         /* Slow-path: cache empty, do real allocation */
>>         page = __page_pool_alloc_pages_slow(pool, gfp);
>> +       if (page)
>> +               page_pool_sub_bias(page, 1);
>> +
> 
> Same here. Really in both cases we should be getting initialized
> pages, not ones that are already decrementing.
> 
>>         return page;
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_alloc_pages);
>>
>> +struct page *page_pool_alloc_frag(struct page_pool *pool,
>> +                                 unsigned int *offset, gfp_t gfp)
>> +{
>> +       unsigned int frag_offset = pool->frag_offset;
>> +       unsigned int frag_size = pool->p.frag_size;
>> +       struct page *frag_page = pool->frag_page;
>> +       unsigned int max_len = pool->p.max_len;
>> +
>> +       if (!frag_page || frag_offset + frag_size > max_len) {
> 
> These are two very different cases. If frag_page is set and just out
> of space we need to be freeing the unused references.

As mention above, we are depending on the last user to do the
recycling or freeing the unused references.

> 
>> +               frag_page = page_pool_alloc_pages(pool, gfp);
> 
> So as per my comment above the page should be coming in with a
> pagecnt_bias of PAGE_SIZE - 1, and an actual page_ref_count of
> PAGE_SIZE.

Let's align the understanding of pagecnt_bias first?

pagecnt_bias meant how many refcnt of a page belong to the page
pool, and (page_ref_count() - pagecnt_bias) means how many refcnt
of a page belong to user of the page pool.

> 
>> +               if (unlikely(!frag_page)) {
>> +                       pool->frag_page = NULL;
>> +                       return NULL;
>> +               }
>> +
>> +               pool->frag_page = frag_page;
>> +               frag_offset = 0;
>> +
>> +               page_pool_sub_bias(frag_page, max_len / frag_size - 1);
> 
> Why are you doing division here? We should just be subtracting 1 from
> the pagecnt_bias since that is the number of buffers that are being
> used. The general idea is that when pagecnt_bias is 0 we cut the page
> loose for potential recycling or freeing, otherwise we just subtract
> our new value from pagecnt_bias until we reach it.

As mentioned above, division is used to find out how many user may be
using the page.

> 
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       *offset = frag_offset;
>> +       pool->frag_offset = frag_offset + frag_size;
>> +
>> +       return frag_page;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_alloc_frag);
>> +
>> +static void page_pool_empty_frag(struct page_pool *pool)
>> +{
>> +       unsigned int frag_offset = pool->frag_offset;
>> +       unsigned int frag_size = pool->p.frag_size;
>> +       struct page *frag_page = pool->frag_page;
>> +       unsigned int max_len = pool->p.max_len;
>> +
>> +       if (!frag_page)
>> +               return;
>> +
>> +       while (frag_offset + frag_size <= max_len) {
>> +               page_pool_put_full_page(pool, frag_page, false);
>> +               frag_offset += frag_size;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       pool->frag_page = NULL;
>> +}
>> +
> 
> It would be good to look over the page_frag_alloc_align and
> __page_frag_cache_drain functions for examples of how to do most of
> this. The one complication is that we have the dma mappings and
> page_pool logic to deal with.

Is it ok to rely on the user providing a aligning frag_size, so
that do not need handling it here?

> 
>>  /* Calculate distance between two u32 values, valid if distance is below 2^(31)
>>   *  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_number_arithmetic#General_Solution
>>   */
>> @@ -326,10 +447,11 @@ static s32 page_pool_inflight(struct page_pool *pool)
>>   * a regular page (that will eventually be returned to the normal
>>   * page-allocator via put_page).
>>   */
>> -void page_pool_release_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
>> +static int __page_pool_release_page(struct page_pool *pool,
>> +                                   struct page *page)
>>  {
>>         dma_addr_t dma;
>> -       int count;
>> +       int bias, count;
>>
>>         if (!(pool->p.flags & PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP))
>>                 /* Always account for inflight pages, even if we didn't
>> @@ -345,22 +467,29 @@ void page_pool_release_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
>>                              DMA_ATTR_SKIP_CPU_SYNC);
>>         page_pool_set_dma_addr(page, 0);
>>  skip_dma_unmap:
>> -       page->pp_magic = 0;
>> +       bias = page_pool_clear_pp_info(page);
>>
>>         /* This may be the last page returned, releasing the pool, so
>>          * it is not safe to reference pool afterwards.
>>          */
>>         count = atomic_inc_return(&pool->pages_state_release_cnt);
>>         trace_page_pool_state_release(pool, page, count);
>> +       return bias;
>> +}
>> +
>> +void page_pool_release_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
>> +{
>> +       int bias = __page_pool_release_page(pool, page);
>> +
>> +       WARN_ONCE(bias, "PAGECNT_BIAS is not supposed to be enabled\n");
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(page_pool_release_page);
>>
>>  /* Return a page to the page allocator, cleaning up our state */
>>  static void page_pool_return_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page)
>>  {
>> -       page_pool_release_page(pool, page);
>> +       __page_frag_cache_drain(page, __page_pool_release_page(pool, page) + 1);
>>
>> -       put_page(page);
>>         /* An optimization would be to call __free_pages(page, pool->p.order)
>>          * knowing page is not part of page-cache (thus avoiding a
>>          * __page_cache_release() call).
>> @@ -395,7 +524,16 @@ static bool page_pool_recycle_in_cache(struct page *page,
>>         return true;
>>  }
>>
>> -/* If the page refcnt == 1, this will try to recycle the page.
>> +static bool page_pool_bias_page_recyclable(struct page *page, int bias)
>> +{
>> +       int ref = page_ref_dec_return(page);
>> +
>> +       WARN_ON(ref < bias);
>> +       return ref == bias + 1;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* If pagecnt_bias == 0 and the page refcnt == 1, this will try to
>> + * recycle the page.
>>   * if PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV is set, we'll try to sync the DMA area for
>>   * the configured size min(dma_sync_size, pool->max_len).
>>   * If the page refcnt != 1, then the page will be returned to memory
>> @@ -405,16 +543,35 @@ static __always_inline struct page *
>>  __page_pool_put_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page,
>>                      unsigned int dma_sync_size, bool allow_direct)
>>  {
>> -       /* This allocator is optimized for the XDP mode that uses
>> +       int bias = page->pp_info->pagecnt_bias;
>> +
>> +       /* Handle the elevated refcnt case first:
>> +        * multi-frames-per-page, it is likely from the skb, which
>> +        * is likely called in non-sofrirq context, so do not recycle
>> +        * it in pool->alloc.
>> +        *
>> +        * Then handle non-elevated refcnt case:
>>          * one-frame-per-page, but have fallbacks that act like the
>>          * regular page allocator APIs.
>> -        *
>>          * refcnt == 1 means page_pool owns page, and can recycle it.
>>          *
>>          * page is NOT reusable when allocated when system is under
>>          * some pressure. (page_is_pfmemalloc)
>>          */
>> -       if (likely(page_ref_count(page) == 1 && !page_is_pfmemalloc(page))) {
>> +       if (bias) {
>> +               /* We have gave some refcnt to the stack, so wait for
>> +                * all refcnt of the stack to be decremented before
>> +                * enabling recycling.
>> +                */
>> +               if (!page_pool_bias_page_recyclable(page, bias))
>> +                       return NULL;
>> +
>> +               /* only enable recycling when it is not pfmemalloced */
>> +               if (!page_is_pfmemalloc(page))
>> +                       return page;
>> +
> 
> So this would be fine if this was only accessed from the driver. The
> problem is the recycling code made it so that this is accessed in the
> generic skb freeing path. As such I think this is prone to races since
> you have to guarantee the ordering of things between the reference
> count and pagecnt_bias.

As reference count is handled atomically is page_pool_bias_page_recyclable,
and pagecnt_bias is changed before any page is handled to the stack(maybe
some READ_ONCE/WRITE_ONCE or barrier is still needed, will check it again),
so I suppose the ordering is correct?

> 
>> +       } else if (likely(page_ref_count(page) == 1 &&
>> +                         !page_is_pfmemalloc(page))) {
>>                 /* Read barrier done in page_ref_count / READ_ONCE */
>>
>>                 if (pool->p.flags & PP_FLAG_DMA_SYNC_DEV)
>> @@ -428,22 +585,8 @@ __page_pool_put_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page,
>>                 /* Page found as candidate for recycling */
>>                 return page;
>>         }
>> -       /* Fallback/non-XDP mode: API user have elevated refcnt.
>> -        *
>> -        * Many drivers split up the page into fragments, and some
>> -        * want to keep doing this to save memory and do refcnt based
>> -        * recycling. Support this use case too, to ease drivers
>> -        * switching between XDP/non-XDP.
>> -        *
>> -        * In-case page_pool maintains the DMA mapping, API user must
>> -        * call page_pool_put_page once.  In this elevated refcnt
>> -        * case, the DMA is unmapped/released, as driver is likely
>> -        * doing refcnt based recycle tricks, meaning another process
>> -        * will be invoking put_page.
>> -        */
>> -       /* Do not replace this with page_pool_return_page() */
>> +
>>         page_pool_release_page(pool, page);
>> -       put_page(page);
>>
>>         return NULL;
>>  }
>> @@ -452,6 +595,7 @@ void page_pool_put_page(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page,
>>                         unsigned int dma_sync_size, bool allow_direct)
>>  {
>>         page = __page_pool_put_page(pool, page, dma_sync_size, allow_direct);
>> +
>>         if (page && !page_pool_recycle_in_ring(pool, page)) {
>>                 /* Cache full, fallback to free pages */
>>                 page_pool_return_page(pool, page);
>> @@ -503,8 +647,11 @@ static void page_pool_empty_ring(struct page_pool *pool)
>>
>>         /* Empty recycle ring */
>>         while ((page = ptr_ring_consume_bh(&pool->ring))) {
>> -               /* Verify the refcnt invariant of cached pages */
>> -               if (!(page_ref_count(page) == 1))
>> +               /* Verify the refcnt invariant of cached pages for
>> +                * non elevated refcnt case.
>> +                */
>> +               if (!(pool->p.flags & PP_FLAG_PAGECNT_BIAS) &&
>> +                   !(page_ref_count(page) == 1))
>>                         pr_crit("%s() page_pool refcnt %d violation\n",
>>                                 __func__, page_ref_count(page));
>>
>> @@ -544,6 +691,7 @@ static void page_pool_empty_alloc_cache_once(struct page_pool *pool)
>>
>>  static void page_pool_scrub(struct page_pool *pool)
>>  {
>> +       page_pool_empty_frag(pool);
>>         page_pool_empty_alloc_cache_once(pool);
>>         pool->destroy_cnt++;
>>
>> @@ -637,14 +785,13 @@ bool page_pool_return_skb_page(struct page *page)
>>         if (unlikely(page->pp_magic != PP_SIGNATURE))
>>                 return false;
>>
>> -       pp = page->pp;
>> +       pp = page->pp_info->pp;
>>
>>         /* Driver set this to memory recycling info. Reset it on recycle.
>>          * This will *not* work for NIC using a split-page memory model.
>>          * The page will be returned to the pool here regardless of the
>>          * 'flipped' fragment being in use or not.
>>          */
>> -       page->pp = NULL;
>>         page_pool_put_full_page(pp, page, false);
>>
>>         return true;
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>
> .
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2021-07-07  3:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-30  9:17 [PATCH net-next RFC 0/2] add elevated refcnt support for page pool Yunsheng Lin
2021-06-30  9:17 ` [PATCH net-next RFC 1/2] page_pool: add page recycling support based on elevated refcnt Yunsheng Lin
2021-07-02  9:42   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2021-07-02 10:15     ` Yunsheng Lin
2021-07-06  4:54       ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-06  6:46         ` Yunsheng Lin
2021-07-06  8:18           ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-06 20:45   ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-07  3:05     ` Yunsheng Lin [this message]
2021-07-07 15:01       ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-07 19:03         ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-07 21:49           ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-08 14:21             ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-08 14:24               ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-08 14:50                 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-08 15:17                   ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-08 15:29                     ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-08 15:36                       ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-08 15:41                         ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-08 15:47                           ` Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-08  2:27         ` Yunsheng Lin
2021-07-08 15:36           ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-09  6:26             ` Yunsheng Lin
2021-07-09 14:15               ` Alexander Duyck
2021-07-10  9:16                 ` [Linuxarm] " Yunsheng Lin
2021-06-30  9:17 ` [PATCH net-next RFC 2/2] net: hns3: support skb's frag page recycling based on page pool Yunsheng Lin
2021-07-02  8:36 ` [PATCH net-next RFC 0/2] add elevated refcnt support for " Ilias Apalodimas
2021-07-02 13:39 ` Matteo Croce
2021-07-06 15:51   ` Russell King (Oracle)
2021-07-06 23:19     ` Matteo Croce
2021-07-07 16:50       ` Marcin Wojtas
2021-07-09  4:15         ` Matteo Croce
2021-07-09  6:40           ` Yunsheng Lin
2021-07-09  6:42             ` Ilias Apalodimas

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=29403911-bc26-dd86-83b8-da3c1784d087@huawei.com \
    --to=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
    --cc=alobakin@pm.me \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cong.wang@bytedance.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=elver@google.com \
    --cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=guro@fb.com \
    --cc=haokexin@gmail.com \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=hughd@google.com \
    --cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jonathan.lemon@gmail.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=linuxarm@openeuler.org \
    --cc=mcroce@microsoft.com \
    --cc=mw@semihalf.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nogikh@google.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=salil.mehta@huawei.com \
    --cc=thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com \
    --cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
    --cc=wenxu@ucloud.cn \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=willemb@google.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    --cc=yisen.zhuang@huawei.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH net-next RFC 1/2] page_pool: add page recycling support based on elevated refcnt' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).