1. Optimization
------------
The current implementation copies the 'from' and 'to' buffers to a
scratchpad and it takes the bitwise NOT of 'from' buffer while copying.
In the next step csum_partial() is called with this scratchpad.
so, mathematically, the current implementation is doing:
result = csum(to - from)
Here, 'to' and '~ from' are copied in to the scratchpad buffer, we need
it in the scratchpad buffer because csum_partial() takes a single
contiguous buffer and not two disjoint buffers like 'to' and 'from'.
We can re write this equation to:
result = csum(to) - csum(from)
using the distributive property of csum().
this allows 'to' and 'from' to be at different locations and therefore
this scratchpad and copying is not needed.
This in C code will look like:
result = csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed),
csum_partial(from, from_size, 0));
2. Homogenization
--------------
The bpf_csum_diff() helper calls csum_partial() which is implemented by
some architectures like arm and x86 but other architectures rely on the
generic implementation in lib/checksum.c
The generic implementation in lib/checksum.c returns a 16 bit value but
the arch specific implementations can return more than 16 bits, this
works out in most places because before the result is used, it is passed
through csum_fold() that turns it into a 16-bit value.
bpf_csum_diff() directly returns the value from csum_partial() and
therefore the returned values could be different on different
architectures. see discussion in [1]:
for the int value 28 the calculated checksums are:
x86 : -29 : 0xffffffe3
generic (arm64, riscv) : 65507 : 0x0000ffe3
arm : 131042 : 0x0001ffe2
Pass the result of bpf_csum_diff() through from32to16() before returning
to homogenize this result for all architectures.
NOTE: from32to16() is used instead of csum_fold() because csum_fold()
does from32to16() + bitwise NOT of the result, which is not what we want
to do here.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAJ+HfNiQbOcqCLxFUP2FMm5QrLXUUaj852Fxe3hn_2JNiucn6g@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
---
net/core/filter.c | 37 +++++++++----------------------------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index bd0d08bf76bb8..e00bec7de9edd 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -1654,18 +1654,6 @@ void sk_reuseport_prog_free(struct bpf_prog *prog)
bpf_prog_destroy(prog);
}
-struct bpf_scratchpad {
- union {
- __be32 diff[MAX_BPF_STACK / sizeof(__be32)];
- u8 buff[MAX_BPF_STACK];
- };
- local_lock_t bh_lock;
-};
-
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct bpf_scratchpad, bpf_sp) = {
- .bh_lock = INIT_LOCAL_LOCK(bh_lock),
-};
-
static inline int __bpf_try_make_writable(struct sk_buff *skb,
unsigned int write_len)
{
@@ -2022,11 +2010,6 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_l4_csum_replace_proto = {
BPF_CALL_5(bpf_csum_diff, __be32 *, from, u32, from_size,
__be32 *, to, u32, to_size, __wsum, seed)
{
- struct bpf_scratchpad *sp = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_sp);
- u32 diff_size = from_size + to_size;
- int i, j = 0;
- __wsum ret;
-
/* This is quite flexible, some examples:
*
* from_size == 0, to_size > 0, seed := csum --> pushing data
@@ -2035,19 +2018,17 @@ BPF_CALL_5(bpf_csum_diff, __be32 *, from, u32, from_size,
*
* Even for diffing, from_size and to_size don't need to be equal.
*/
- if (unlikely(((from_size | to_size) & (sizeof(__be32) - 1)) ||
- diff_size > sizeof(sp->diff)))
- return -EINVAL;
- local_lock_nested_bh(&bpf_sp.bh_lock);
- for (i = 0; i < from_size / sizeof(__be32); i++, j++)
- sp->diff[j] = ~from[i];
- for (i = 0; i < to_size / sizeof(__be32); i++, j++)
- sp->diff[j] = to[i];
+ if (from_size && to_size)
+ return csum_from32to16(csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed),
+ csum_partial(from, from_size, 0)));
+ if (to_size)
+ return csum_from32to16(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed));
- ret = csum_partial(sp->diff, diff_size, seed);
- local_unlock_nested_bh(&bpf_sp.bh_lock);
- return ret;
+ if (from_size)
+ return csum_from32to16(~csum_partial(from, from_size, ~seed));
+
+ return seed;
}
static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_csum_diff_proto = {
--
2.40.1Hi Puranjay,
kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings:
[auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]
url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Puranjay-Mohan/net-checksum-move-from32to16-to-generic-header/20241021-202707
base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241021122112.101513-3-puranjay%40kernel.org
patch subject: [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] bpf: bpf_csum_diff: optimize and homogenize for all archs
config: x86_64-randconfig-122-20241022 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241023/202410230122.BYZLEUHz-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: gcc-12 (Debian 12.2.0-14) 12.2.0
reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20241023/202410230122.BYZLEUHz-lkp@intel.com/reproduce)
If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of
the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags
| Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
| Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202410230122.BYZLEUHz-lkp@intel.com/
sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
net/core/filter.c:1423:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected struct sock_filter const *filter @@ got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter @@
net/core/filter.c:1423:39: sparse: expected struct sock_filter const *filter
net/core/filter.c:1423:39: sparse: got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter
net/core/filter.c:1501:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces) @@ expected struct sock_filter const *filter @@ got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter @@
net/core/filter.c:1501:39: sparse: expected struct sock_filter const *filter
net/core/filter.c:1501:39: sparse: got struct sock_filter [noderef] __user *filter
net/core/filter.c:2321:45: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] daddr @@ got unsigned int [usertype] ipv4_nh @@
net/core/filter.c:2321:45: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] daddr
net/core/filter.c:2321:45: sparse: got unsigned int [usertype] ipv4_nh
net/core/filter.c:10993:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_filter_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11000:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_filter_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11004:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'tc_cls_act_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11013:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'tc_cls_act_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11017:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'xdp_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11029:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_skb_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11035:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_skb_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11039:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_in_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11045:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_in_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11049:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_out_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11055:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_out_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11059:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_xmit_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11066:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_xmit_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11070:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_seg6local_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11076:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'lwt_seg6local_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11079:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11085:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11088:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_addr_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11094:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'cg_sock_addr_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11097:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sock_ops_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11103:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sock_ops_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11106:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_skb_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11113:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_skb_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11116:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_msg_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11123:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_msg_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11126:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'flow_dissector_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11132:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'flow_dissector_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11460:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_reuseport_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11466:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_reuseport_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11668:27: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_lookup_prog_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:11672:31: sparse: sparse: symbol 'sk_lookup_verifier_ops' was not declared. Should it be static?
net/core/filter.c:1931:43: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@
net/core/filter.c:1931:43: sparse: expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff
net/core/filter.c:1931:43: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1934:36: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] old @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@
net/core/filter.c:1934:36: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] old
net/core/filter.c:1934:36: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from
net/core/filter.c:1934:42: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] new @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@
net/core/filter.c:1934:42: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] new
net/core/filter.c:1934:42: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1937:36: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 2 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@
net/core/filter.c:1937:36: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from
net/core/filter.c:1937:36: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from
net/core/filter.c:1937:42: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@
net/core/filter.c:1937:42: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1937:42: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1982:59: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@
net/core/filter.c:1982:59: sparse: expected restricted __wsum [usertype] diff
net/core/filter.c:1982:59: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1985:52: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] from @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@
net/core/filter.c:1985:52: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] from
net/core/filter.c:1985:52: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from
net/core/filter.c:1985:58: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 4 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be16 [usertype] to @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@
net/core/filter.c:1985:58: sparse: expected restricted __be16 [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1985:58: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1988:52: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 3 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] from @@
net/core/filter.c:1988:52: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] from
net/core/filter.c:1988:52: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] from
net/core/filter.c:1988:58: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in argument 4 (different base types) @@ expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to @@ got unsigned long long [usertype] to @@
net/core/filter.c:1988:58: sparse: expected restricted __be32 [usertype] to
net/core/filter.c:1988:58: sparse: got unsigned long long [usertype] to
>> net/core/filter.c:2023:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected unsigned long long @@ got restricted __sum16 @@
net/core/filter.c:2023:39: sparse: expected unsigned long long
net/core/filter.c:2023:39: sparse: got restricted __sum16
net/core/filter.c:2026:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected unsigned long long @@ got restricted __sum16 @@
net/core/filter.c:2026:39: sparse: expected unsigned long long
net/core/filter.c:2026:39: sparse: got restricted __sum16
net/core/filter.c:2029:39: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected unsigned long long @@ got restricted __sum16 @@
net/core/filter.c:2029:39: sparse: expected unsigned long long
net/core/filter.c:2029:39: sparse: got restricted __sum16
>> net/core/filter.c:2031:16: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected unsigned long long @@ got restricted __wsum [usertype] seed @@
net/core/filter.c:2031:16: sparse: expected unsigned long long
net/core/filter.c:2031:16: sparse: got restricted __wsum [usertype] seed
net/core/filter.c:2053:35: sparse: sparse: incorrect type in return expression (different base types) @@ expected unsigned long long @@ got restricted __wsum [usertype] csum @@
net/core/filter.c:2053:35: sparse: expected unsigned long long
net/core/filter.c:2053:35: sparse: got restricted __wsum [usertype] csum
vim +2023 net/core/filter.c
1956
1957 BPF_CALL_5(bpf_l4_csum_replace, struct sk_buff *, skb, u32, offset,
1958 u64, from, u64, to, u64, flags)
1959 {
1960 bool is_pseudo = flags & BPF_F_PSEUDO_HDR;
1961 bool is_mmzero = flags & BPF_F_MARK_MANGLED_0;
1962 bool do_mforce = flags & BPF_F_MARK_ENFORCE;
1963 __sum16 *ptr;
1964
1965 if (unlikely(flags & ~(BPF_F_MARK_MANGLED_0 | BPF_F_MARK_ENFORCE |
1966 BPF_F_PSEUDO_HDR | BPF_F_HDR_FIELD_MASK)))
1967 return -EINVAL;
1968 if (unlikely(offset > 0xffff || offset & 1))
1969 return -EFAULT;
1970 if (unlikely(bpf_try_make_writable(skb, offset + sizeof(*ptr))))
1971 return -EFAULT;
1972
1973 ptr = (__sum16 *)(skb->data + offset);
1974 if (is_mmzero && !do_mforce && !*ptr)
1975 return 0;
1976
1977 switch (flags & BPF_F_HDR_FIELD_MASK) {
1978 case 0:
1979 if (unlikely(from != 0))
1980 return -EINVAL;
1981
1982 inet_proto_csum_replace_by_diff(ptr, skb, to, is_pseudo);
1983 break;
1984 case 2:
> 1985 inet_proto_csum_replace2(ptr, skb, from, to, is_pseudo);
1986 break;
1987 case 4:
1988 inet_proto_csum_replace4(ptr, skb, from, to, is_pseudo);
1989 break;
1990 default:
1991 return -EINVAL;
1992 }
1993
1994 if (is_mmzero && !*ptr)
1995 *ptr = CSUM_MANGLED_0;
1996 return 0;
1997 }
1998
1999 static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_l4_csum_replace_proto = {
2000 .func = bpf_l4_csum_replace,
2001 .gpl_only = false,
2002 .ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
2003 .arg1_type = ARG_PTR_TO_CTX,
2004 .arg2_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
2005 .arg3_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
2006 .arg4_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
2007 .arg5_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
2008 };
2009
2010 BPF_CALL_5(bpf_csum_diff, __be32 *, from, u32, from_size,
2011 __be32 *, to, u32, to_size, __wsum, seed)
2012 {
2013 /* This is quite flexible, some examples:
2014 *
2015 * from_size == 0, to_size > 0, seed := csum --> pushing data
2016 * from_size > 0, to_size == 0, seed := csum --> pulling data
2017 * from_size > 0, to_size > 0, seed := 0 --> diffing data
2018 *
2019 * Even for diffing, from_size and to_size don't need to be equal.
2020 */
2021
2022 if (from_size && to_size)
> 2023 return csum_from32to16(csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed),
2024 csum_partial(from, from_size, 0)));
2025 if (to_size)
2026 return csum_from32to16(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed));
2027
2028 if (from_size)
2029 return csum_from32to16(~csum_partial(from, from_size, ~seed));
2030
> 2031 return seed;
2032 }
2033
--
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service
https://github.com/intel/lkp-tests/wiki
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org> writes: > 1. Optimization > ------------ > > The current implementation copies the 'from' and 'to' buffers to a > scratchpad and it takes the bitwise NOT of 'from' buffer while copying. > In the next step csum_partial() is called with this scratchpad. > > so, mathematically, the current implementation is doing: > > result = csum(to - from) > > Here, 'to' and '~ from' are copied in to the scratchpad buffer, we need > it in the scratchpad buffer because csum_partial() takes a single > contiguous buffer and not two disjoint buffers like 'to' and 'from'. > > We can re write this equation to: > > result = csum(to) - csum(from) > > using the distributive property of csum(). > > this allows 'to' and 'from' to be at different locations and therefore > this scratchpad and copying is not needed. > > This in C code will look like: > > result = csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed), > csum_partial(from, from_size, 0)); > > 2. Homogenization > -------------- > > The bpf_csum_diff() helper calls csum_partial() which is implemented by > some architectures like arm and x86 but other architectures rely on the > generic implementation in lib/checksum.c > > The generic implementation in lib/checksum.c returns a 16 bit value but > the arch specific implementations can return more than 16 bits, this > works out in most places because before the result is used, it is passed > through csum_fold() that turns it into a 16-bit value. > > bpf_csum_diff() directly returns the value from csum_partial() and > therefore the returned values could be different on different > architectures. see discussion in [1]: > > for the int value 28 the calculated checksums are: > > x86 : -29 : 0xffffffe3 > generic (arm64, riscv) : 65507 : 0x0000ffe3 > arm : 131042 : 0x0001ffe2 > > Pass the result of bpf_csum_diff() through from32to16() before returning > to homogenize this result for all architectures. > > NOTE: from32to16() is used instead of csum_fold() because csum_fold() > does from32to16() + bitwise NOT of the result, which is not what we want > to do here. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAJ+HfNiQbOcqCLxFUP2FMm5QrLXUUaj852Fxe3hn_2JNiucn6g@mail.gmail.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org> Pretty neat simplification :) Reviewed-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com>
On 10/21/24 2:21 PM, Puranjay Mohan wrote: > 1. Optimization > ------------ > > The current implementation copies the 'from' and 'to' buffers to a > scratchpad and it takes the bitwise NOT of 'from' buffer while copying. > In the next step csum_partial() is called with this scratchpad. > > so, mathematically, the current implementation is doing: > > result = csum(to - from) > > Here, 'to' and '~ from' are copied in to the scratchpad buffer, we need > it in the scratchpad buffer because csum_partial() takes a single > contiguous buffer and not two disjoint buffers like 'to' and 'from'. > > We can re write this equation to: > > result = csum(to) - csum(from) > > using the distributive property of csum(). > > this allows 'to' and 'from' to be at different locations and therefore > this scratchpad and copying is not needed. > > This in C code will look like: > > result = csum_sub(csum_partial(to, to_size, seed), > csum_partial(from, from_size, 0)); > > 2. Homogenization > -------------- > > The bpf_csum_diff() helper calls csum_partial() which is implemented by > some architectures like arm and x86 but other architectures rely on the > generic implementation in lib/checksum.c > > The generic implementation in lib/checksum.c returns a 16 bit value but > the arch specific implementations can return more than 16 bits, this > works out in most places because before the result is used, it is passed > through csum_fold() that turns it into a 16-bit value. > > bpf_csum_diff() directly returns the value from csum_partial() and > therefore the returned values could be different on different > architectures. see discussion in [1]: > > for the int value 28 the calculated checksums are: > > x86 : -29 : 0xffffffe3 > generic (arm64, riscv) : 65507 : 0x0000ffe3 > arm : 131042 : 0x0001ffe2 > > Pass the result of bpf_csum_diff() through from32to16() before returning > to homogenize this result for all architectures. > > NOTE: from32to16() is used instead of csum_fold() because csum_fold() > does from32to16() + bitwise NOT of the result, which is not what we want > to do here. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAJ+HfNiQbOcqCLxFUP2FMm5QrLXUUaj852Fxe3hn_2JNiucn6g@mail.gmail.com/ > > Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org> Thanks for looking into this! Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.