diff mbox series

[stable,6.1] net: sockmap, fix missing MSG_MORE causing TCP disruptions

Message ID 20240503164805.59970-1-john.fastabend@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State Handled Elsewhere
Delegated to: Netdev Maintainers
Headers show
Series [stable,6.1] net: sockmap, fix missing MSG_MORE causing TCP disruptions | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/tree_selection success Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply

Commit Message

John Fastabend May 3, 2024, 4:48 p.m. UTC
[ Upstream commit ebf2e8860eea66e2c4764316b80c6a5ee5f336ee]
[ Upstream commit f8dd95b29d7ef08c19ec9720564acf72243ddcf6]

In the first patch,

ebf2e8860eea ("tcp_bpf: Inline do_tcp_sendpages as it's now a wrapper around tcp_sendmsg")

This block of code is added to tcp_bpf_push(). The
tcp_bpf_push is the code used by BPF to submit messages into the TCP
stack.

 if (flags & MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST)
     msghdr.msg_flags | MSG_MORE;

In the second patch,

f8dd95b29d7e ("tcp_bpf, smc, tls, espintcp, siw: Reduce MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST usage")

this logic was further changed to,

  if (flags & MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST)
     msghdr.msg_flags |= MSG_MORE

This was done as part of an improvement to use the sendmsg() callbacks
and remove the sendpage usage inside the various sub systems.

However, these two patches together fixed a bug. The issue is without
MSG_MORE set we will break a msg up into many smaller sends. In some
case a lot because the operation loops over the scatter gather list.
Without the MSG_MORE set (the current 6.1 case) we see stalls in data
send/recv and sometimes applications failing to receive data. This
generally is the result of an application that gives up after calling
recv() or similar too many times. We introduce this because of how
we incorrectly change the TCP send pattern.

Now that we have both 6.5 and 6.1 stable kernels deployed we've
observed a series of issues related to this in real deployments. In 6.5
kernels all the HTTP and other compliance tests pass and we are not
observing any other issues. On 6.1 various compliance tests fail
(nginx for example), but more importantly in these clusters without
the flag set we observe stalled applications and increased retries in
other applications. Openssl users where we have annotations to monitor
retries and failures observed a significant increase in retries for
example.

For the backport we isolated the fix to the two lines in the above
patches that fixed the code. With this patch we deployed the workloads
again and error rates and stalls went away and 6.1 stable kernels
perform similar to 6.5 stable kernels. Similarly the compliance tests
also passed.

Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.1.x
Fixes: 604326b41a6fb ("tcp_bpf, smc, tls, espintcp, siw: Reduce MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST usage")
Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
---
 net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Comments

Daniel Borkmann May 3, 2024, 6:16 p.m. UTC | #1
On 5/3/24 6:48 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> [ Upstream commit ebf2e8860eea66e2c4764316b80c6a5ee5f336ee]
> [ Upstream commit f8dd95b29d7ef08c19ec9720564acf72243ddcf6]
> 
> In the first patch,
> 
> ebf2e8860eea ("tcp_bpf: Inline do_tcp_sendpages as it's now a wrapper around tcp_sendmsg")
> 
> This block of code is added to tcp_bpf_push(). The
> tcp_bpf_push is the code used by BPF to submit messages into the TCP
> stack.
> 
>   if (flags & MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST)
>       msghdr.msg_flags | MSG_MORE;
> 
> In the second patch,
> 
> f8dd95b29d7e ("tcp_bpf, smc, tls, espintcp, siw: Reduce MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST usage")
> 
> this logic was further changed to,
> 
>    if (flags & MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST)
>       msghdr.msg_flags |= MSG_MORE
> 
> This was done as part of an improvement to use the sendmsg() callbacks
> and remove the sendpage usage inside the various sub systems.
> 
> However, these two patches together fixed a bug. The issue is without
> MSG_MORE set we will break a msg up into many smaller sends. In some
> case a lot because the operation loops over the scatter gather list.
> Without the MSG_MORE set (the current 6.1 case) we see stalls in data
> send/recv and sometimes applications failing to receive data. This
> generally is the result of an application that gives up after calling
> recv() or similar too many times. We introduce this because of how
> we incorrectly change the TCP send pattern.
> 
> Now that we have both 6.5 and 6.1 stable kernels deployed we've
> observed a series of issues related to this in real deployments. In 6.5
> kernels all the HTTP and other compliance tests pass and we are not
> observing any other issues. On 6.1 various compliance tests fail
> (nginx for example), but more importantly in these clusters without
> the flag set we observe stalled applications and increased retries in
> other applications. Openssl users where we have annotations to monitor
> retries and failures observed a significant increase in retries for
> example.
> 
> For the backport we isolated the fix to the two lines in the above
> patches that fixed the code. With this patch we deployed the workloads
> again and error rates and stalls went away and 6.1 stable kernels
> perform similar to 6.5 stable kernels. Similarly the compliance tests
> also passed.
> 
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # 6.1.x
> Fixes: 604326b41a6fb ("tcp_bpf, smc, tls, espintcp, siw: Reduce MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST usage")
> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>

Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Greg KH May 4, 2024, 7:30 a.m. UTC | #2
On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 09:48:05AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> [ Upstream commit ebf2e8860eea66e2c4764316b80c6a5ee5f336ee]
> [ Upstream commit f8dd95b29d7ef08c19ec9720564acf72243ddcf6]

Why are you mushing 2 patches together?  Why can't we just take the two
as-is instead?  That makes tracking everything much simpler and
possible.

> In the first patch,
> 
> ebf2e8860eea ("tcp_bpf: Inline do_tcp_sendpages as it's now a wrapper around tcp_sendmsg")
> 
> This block of code is added to tcp_bpf_push(). The
> tcp_bpf_push is the code used by BPF to submit messages into the TCP
> stack.
> 
>  if (flags & MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST)
>      msghdr.msg_flags | MSG_MORE;
> 
> In the second patch,
> 
> f8dd95b29d7e ("tcp_bpf, smc, tls, espintcp, siw: Reduce MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST usage")
> 
> this logic was further changed to,
> 
>   if (flags & MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST)
>      msghdr.msg_flags |= MSG_MORE
> 
> This was done as part of an improvement to use the sendmsg() callbacks
> and remove the sendpage usage inside the various sub systems.
> 
> However, these two patches together fixed a bug. The issue is without
> MSG_MORE set we will break a msg up into many smaller sends. In some
> case a lot because the operation loops over the scatter gather list.
> Without the MSG_MORE set (the current 6.1 case) we see stalls in data
> send/recv and sometimes applications failing to receive data. This
> generally is the result of an application that gives up after calling
> recv() or similar too many times. We introduce this because of how
> we incorrectly change the TCP send pattern.
> 
> Now that we have both 6.5 and 6.1 stable kernels deployed we've
> observed a series of issues related to this in real deployments. In 6.5
> kernels all the HTTP and other compliance tests pass and we are not
> observing any other issues. On 6.1 various compliance tests fail
> (nginx for example), but more importantly in these clusters without
> the flag set we observe stalled applications and increased retries in
> other applications. Openssl users where we have annotations to monitor
> retries and failures observed a significant increase in retries for
> example.
> 
> For the backport we isolated the fix to the two lines in the above
> patches that fixed the code. With this patch we deployed the workloads
> again and error rates and stalls went away and 6.1 stable kernels
> perform similar to 6.5 stable kernels. Similarly the compliance tests
> also passed.

Can we just take the two original patches instead?

thanks,

greg k-h
John Fastabend May 4, 2024, 4:48 p.m. UTC | #3
Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, May 03, 2024 at 09:48:05AM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
> > [ Upstream commit ebf2e8860eea66e2c4764316b80c6a5ee5f336ee]
> > [ Upstream commit f8dd95b29d7ef08c19ec9720564acf72243ddcf6]
> 
> Why are you mushing 2 patches together?  Why can't we just take the two
> as-is instead?  That makes tracking everything much simpler and
> possible.

OK the thought was to get the minimal diff needed. But that
is problematic. We can take the first one as-is and
then the second one will have a couple chunks that don't
apply but we don't need those chunks because the infiniband
part it touches doesn't have the same issue in 6.1.

> 
> > In the first patch,

[...]

> > For the backport we isolated the fix to the two lines in the above
> > patches that fixed the code. With this patch we deployed the workloads
> > again and error rates and stalls went away and 6.1 stable kernels
> > perform similar to 6.5 stable kernels. Similarly the compliance tests
> > also passed.
> 
> Can we just take the two original patches instead?

Yes minus the couple chunks that don't apply on the second one. I'll
do some testing and resend thanks.

> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c
index f8037d142bb7..20d94f67fde2 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c
@@ -105,6 +105,9 @@  static int tcp_bpf_push(struct sock *sk, struct sk_msg *msg, u32 apply_bytes,
 
 		tcp_rate_check_app_limited(sk);
 retry:
+		if (size < sge->length && msg->sg.start != msg->sg.end)
+			flags |= MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST;
+
 		has_tx_ulp = tls_sw_has_ctx_tx(sk);
 		if (has_tx_ulp) {
 			flags |= MSG_SENDPAGE_NOPOLICY;