linux/kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c

478 lines
13 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
#include <linux/bpf.h>
#include <linux/btf.h>
#include <linux/err.h>
#include <linux/irq_work.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/filter.h>
#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
#include <linux/wait.h>
#include <linux/poll.h>
bpf: Fix false positive kmemleak report in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc() kmemleak scans struct page, but it does not scan the page content. If we allocate some memory with kmalloc(), then allocate page with alloc_page(), and if we put kmalloc pointer somewhere inside that page, kmemleak will report kmalloc pointer as a false positive. We can instruct kmemleak to scan the memory area by calling kmemleak_alloc() and kmemleak_free(), but part of struct bpf_ringbuf is mmaped to user space, and if struct bpf_ringbuf changes we would have to revisit and review size argument in kmemleak_alloc(), because we do not want kmemleak to scan the user space memory. Let's simplify things and use kmemleak_not_leak() here. For posterity, also adding additional prior analysis from Andrii: I think either kmemleak or syzbot are misreporting this. I've added a bunch of printks around all allocations performed by BPF ringbuf. [...] On repro side I get these two warnings: [vmuser@archvm bpf]$ sudo ./repro BUG: memory leak unreferenced object 0xffff88810d538c00 (size 64): comm "repro", pid 2140, jiffies 4294692933 (age 14.540s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 00 af 19 04 00 ea ff ff c0 ae 19 04 00 ea ff ff ................ 80 ae 19 04 00 ea ff ff c0 29 2e 04 00 ea ff ff .........)...... backtrace: [<0000000077bfbfbd>] __bpf_map_area_alloc+0x31/0xc0 [<00000000587fa522>] ringbuf_map_alloc.cold.4+0x48/0x218 [<0000000044d49e96>] __do_sys_bpf+0x359/0x1d90 [<00000000f601d565>] do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x40 [<0000000043d3112a>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae BUG: memory leak unreferenced object 0xffff88810d538c80 (size 64): comm "repro", pid 2143, jiffies 4294699025 (age 8.448s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 80 aa 19 04 00 ea ff ff 00 ab 19 04 00 ea ff ff ................ c0 ab 19 04 00 ea ff ff 80 44 28 04 00 ea ff ff .........D(..... backtrace: [<0000000077bfbfbd>] __bpf_map_area_alloc+0x31/0xc0 [<00000000587fa522>] ringbuf_map_alloc.cold.4+0x48/0x218 [<0000000044d49e96>] __do_sys_bpf+0x359/0x1d90 [<00000000f601d565>] do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x40 [<0000000043d3112a>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae Note that both reported leaks (ffff88810d538c80 and ffff88810d538c00) correspond to pages array bpf_ringbuf is allocating and tracking properly internally. Note also that syzbot repro doesn't close FD of created BPF ringbufs, and even when ./repro itself exits with error, there are still two forked processes hanging around in my system. So clearly ringbuf maps are alive at that point. So reporting any memory leak looks weird at that point, because that memory is being used by active referenced BPF ringbuf. It's also a question why repro doesn't clean up its forks. But if I do a `pkill repro`, I do see that all the allocated memory is /properly/ cleaned up [and the] "leaks" are deallocated properly. BTW, if I add close() right after bpf() syscall in syzbot repro, I see that everything is immediately deallocated, like designed. And no memory leak is reported. So I don't think the problem is anywhere in bpf_ringbuf code, rather in the leak detection and/or repro itself. Reported-by: syzbot+5d895828587f49e7fe9b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@gmail.com> [ Daniel: also included analysis from Andrii to the commit log ] Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Tested-by: syzbot+5d895828587f49e7fe9b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzYk+dqs+jwu6VKXP-RttcTEGFe+ySTGWT9CRNkagDiJVA@mail.gmail.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YNTAqiE7CWJhOK2M@nuc10 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210615101515.GC26027@arm.com Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=5d895828587f49e7fe9b Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210626181156.1873604-1-rkovhaev@gmail.com
2021-06-27 02:11:56 +08:00
#include <linux/kmemleak.h>
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
#include <uapi/linux/btf.h>
#define RINGBUF_CREATE_FLAG_MASK (BPF_F_NUMA_NODE)
/* non-mmap()'able part of bpf_ringbuf (everything up to consumer page) */
#define RINGBUF_PGOFF \
(offsetof(struct bpf_ringbuf, consumer_pos) >> PAGE_SHIFT)
/* consumer page and producer page */
#define RINGBUF_POS_PAGES 2
#define RINGBUF_MAX_RECORD_SZ (UINT_MAX/4)
/* Maximum size of ring buffer area is limited by 32-bit page offset within
* record header, counted in pages. Reserve 8 bits for extensibility, and take
* into account few extra pages for consumer/producer pages and
* non-mmap()'able parts. This gives 64GB limit, which seems plenty for single
* ring buffer.
*/
#define RINGBUF_MAX_DATA_SZ \
(((1ULL << 24) - RINGBUF_POS_PAGES - RINGBUF_PGOFF) * PAGE_SIZE)
struct bpf_ringbuf {
wait_queue_head_t waitq;
struct irq_work work;
u64 mask;
struct page **pages;
int nr_pages;
spinlock_t spinlock ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
/* Consumer and producer counters are put into separate pages to allow
* mapping consumer page as r/w, but restrict producer page to r/o.
* This protects producer position from being modified by user-space
* application and ruining in-kernel position tracking.
*/
unsigned long consumer_pos __aligned(PAGE_SIZE);
unsigned long producer_pos __aligned(PAGE_SIZE);
char data[] __aligned(PAGE_SIZE);
};
struct bpf_ringbuf_map {
struct bpf_map map;
struct bpf_ringbuf *rb;
};
/* 8-byte ring buffer record header structure */
struct bpf_ringbuf_hdr {
u32 len;
u32 pg_off;
};
static struct bpf_ringbuf *bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(size_t data_sz, int numa_node)
{
const gfp_t flags = GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL |
__GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_ZERO;
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
int nr_meta_pages = RINGBUF_PGOFF + RINGBUF_POS_PAGES;
int nr_data_pages = data_sz >> PAGE_SHIFT;
int nr_pages = nr_meta_pages + nr_data_pages;
struct page **pages, *page;
struct bpf_ringbuf *rb;
size_t array_size;
int i;
/* Each data page is mapped twice to allow "virtual"
* continuous read of samples wrapping around the end of ring
* buffer area:
* ------------------------------------------------------
* | meta pages | real data pages | same data pages |
* ------------------------------------------------------
* | | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |
* ------------------------------------------------------
* | | TA DA | TA DA |
* ------------------------------------------------------
* ^^^^^^^
* |
* Here, no need to worry about special handling of wrapped-around
* data due to double-mapped data pages. This works both in kernel and
* when mmap()'ed in user-space, simplifying both kernel and
* user-space implementations significantly.
*/
array_size = (nr_meta_pages + 2 * nr_data_pages) * sizeof(*pages);
pages = bpf_map_area_alloc(array_size, numa_node);
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
if (!pages)
return NULL;
for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) {
page = alloc_pages_node(numa_node, flags, 0);
if (!page) {
nr_pages = i;
goto err_free_pages;
}
pages[i] = page;
if (i >= nr_meta_pages)
pages[nr_data_pages + i] = page;
}
rb = vmap(pages, nr_meta_pages + 2 * nr_data_pages,
VM_MAP | VM_USERMAP, PAGE_KERNEL);
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
if (rb) {
bpf: Fix false positive kmemleak report in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc() kmemleak scans struct page, but it does not scan the page content. If we allocate some memory with kmalloc(), then allocate page with alloc_page(), and if we put kmalloc pointer somewhere inside that page, kmemleak will report kmalloc pointer as a false positive. We can instruct kmemleak to scan the memory area by calling kmemleak_alloc() and kmemleak_free(), but part of struct bpf_ringbuf is mmaped to user space, and if struct bpf_ringbuf changes we would have to revisit and review size argument in kmemleak_alloc(), because we do not want kmemleak to scan the user space memory. Let's simplify things and use kmemleak_not_leak() here. For posterity, also adding additional prior analysis from Andrii: I think either kmemleak or syzbot are misreporting this. I've added a bunch of printks around all allocations performed by BPF ringbuf. [...] On repro side I get these two warnings: [vmuser@archvm bpf]$ sudo ./repro BUG: memory leak unreferenced object 0xffff88810d538c00 (size 64): comm "repro", pid 2140, jiffies 4294692933 (age 14.540s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 00 af 19 04 00 ea ff ff c0 ae 19 04 00 ea ff ff ................ 80 ae 19 04 00 ea ff ff c0 29 2e 04 00 ea ff ff .........)...... backtrace: [<0000000077bfbfbd>] __bpf_map_area_alloc+0x31/0xc0 [<00000000587fa522>] ringbuf_map_alloc.cold.4+0x48/0x218 [<0000000044d49e96>] __do_sys_bpf+0x359/0x1d90 [<00000000f601d565>] do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x40 [<0000000043d3112a>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae BUG: memory leak unreferenced object 0xffff88810d538c80 (size 64): comm "repro", pid 2143, jiffies 4294699025 (age 8.448s) hex dump (first 32 bytes): 80 aa 19 04 00 ea ff ff 00 ab 19 04 00 ea ff ff ................ c0 ab 19 04 00 ea ff ff 80 44 28 04 00 ea ff ff .........D(..... backtrace: [<0000000077bfbfbd>] __bpf_map_area_alloc+0x31/0xc0 [<00000000587fa522>] ringbuf_map_alloc.cold.4+0x48/0x218 [<0000000044d49e96>] __do_sys_bpf+0x359/0x1d90 [<00000000f601d565>] do_syscall_64+0x2d/0x40 [<0000000043d3112a>] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae Note that both reported leaks (ffff88810d538c80 and ffff88810d538c00) correspond to pages array bpf_ringbuf is allocating and tracking properly internally. Note also that syzbot repro doesn't close FD of created BPF ringbufs, and even when ./repro itself exits with error, there are still two forked processes hanging around in my system. So clearly ringbuf maps are alive at that point. So reporting any memory leak looks weird at that point, because that memory is being used by active referenced BPF ringbuf. It's also a question why repro doesn't clean up its forks. But if I do a `pkill repro`, I do see that all the allocated memory is /properly/ cleaned up [and the] "leaks" are deallocated properly. BTW, if I add close() right after bpf() syscall in syzbot repro, I see that everything is immediately deallocated, like designed. And no memory leak is reported. So I don't think the problem is anywhere in bpf_ringbuf code, rather in the leak detection and/or repro itself. Reported-by: syzbot+5d895828587f49e7fe9b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Signed-off-by: Rustam Kovhaev <rkovhaev@gmail.com> [ Daniel: also included analysis from Andrii to the commit log ] Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Tested-by: syzbot+5d895828587f49e7fe9b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzYk+dqs+jwu6VKXP-RttcTEGFe+ySTGWT9CRNkagDiJVA@mail.gmail.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YNTAqiE7CWJhOK2M@nuc10 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210615101515.GC26027@arm.com Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=5d895828587f49e7fe9b Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210626181156.1873604-1-rkovhaev@gmail.com
2021-06-27 02:11:56 +08:00
kmemleak_not_leak(pages);
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
rb->pages = pages;
rb->nr_pages = nr_pages;
return rb;
}
err_free_pages:
for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++)
__free_page(pages[i]);
kvfree(pages);
return NULL;
}
static void bpf_ringbuf_notify(struct irq_work *work)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf *rb = container_of(work, struct bpf_ringbuf, work);
wake_up_all(&rb->waitq);
}
static struct bpf_ringbuf *bpf_ringbuf_alloc(size_t data_sz, int numa_node)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf *rb;
rb = bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(data_sz, numa_node);
if (!rb)
return NULL;
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
spin_lock_init(&rb->spinlock);
init_waitqueue_head(&rb->waitq);
init_irq_work(&rb->work, bpf_ringbuf_notify);
rb->mask = data_sz - 1;
rb->consumer_pos = 0;
rb->producer_pos = 0;
return rb;
}
static struct bpf_map *ringbuf_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf_map *rb_map;
if (attr->map_flags & ~RINGBUF_CREATE_FLAG_MASK)
return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
if (attr->key_size || attr->value_size ||
!is_power_of_2(attr->max_entries) ||
!PAGE_ALIGNED(attr->max_entries))
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
/* on 32-bit arch, it's impossible to overflow record's hdr->pgoff */
if (attr->max_entries > RINGBUF_MAX_DATA_SZ)
return ERR_PTR(-E2BIG);
#endif
rb_map = kzalloc(sizeof(*rb_map), GFP_USER | __GFP_ACCOUNT);
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
if (!rb_map)
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
bpf_map_init_from_attr(&rb_map->map, attr);
rb_map->rb = bpf_ringbuf_alloc(attr->max_entries, rb_map->map.numa_node);
if (!rb_map->rb) {
kfree(rb_map);
return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
}
return &rb_map->map;
}
static void bpf_ringbuf_free(struct bpf_ringbuf *rb)
{
/* copy pages pointer and nr_pages to local variable, as we are going
* to unmap rb itself with vunmap() below
*/
struct page **pages = rb->pages;
int i, nr_pages = rb->nr_pages;
vunmap(rb);
for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++)
__free_page(pages[i]);
kvfree(pages);
}
static void ringbuf_map_free(struct bpf_map *map)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf_map *rb_map;
rb_map = container_of(map, struct bpf_ringbuf_map, map);
bpf_ringbuf_free(rb_map->rb);
kfree(rb_map);
}
static void *ringbuf_map_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
{
return ERR_PTR(-ENOTSUPP);
}
static int ringbuf_map_update_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key, void *value,
u64 flags)
{
return -ENOTSUPP;
}
static int ringbuf_map_delete_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key)
{
return -ENOTSUPP;
}
static int ringbuf_map_get_next_key(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
void *next_key)
{
return -ENOTSUPP;
}
static int ringbuf_map_mmap(struct bpf_map *map, struct vm_area_struct *vma)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf_map *rb_map;
rb_map = container_of(map, struct bpf_ringbuf_map, map);
if (vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE) {
/* allow writable mapping for the consumer_pos only */
if (vma->vm_pgoff != 0 || vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start != PAGE_SIZE)
return -EPERM;
} else {
vma->vm_flags &= ~VM_MAYWRITE;
}
/* remap_vmalloc_range() checks size and offset constraints */
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
return remap_vmalloc_range(vma, rb_map->rb,
vma->vm_pgoff + RINGBUF_PGOFF);
}
static unsigned long ringbuf_avail_data_sz(struct bpf_ringbuf *rb)
{
unsigned long cons_pos, prod_pos;
cons_pos = smp_load_acquire(&rb->consumer_pos);
prod_pos = smp_load_acquire(&rb->producer_pos);
return prod_pos - cons_pos;
}
static __poll_t ringbuf_map_poll(struct bpf_map *map, struct file *filp,
struct poll_table_struct *pts)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf_map *rb_map;
rb_map = container_of(map, struct bpf_ringbuf_map, map);
poll_wait(filp, &rb_map->rb->waitq, pts);
if (ringbuf_avail_data_sz(rb_map->rb))
return EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM;
return 0;
}
static int ringbuf_map_btf_id;
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
const struct bpf_map_ops ringbuf_map_ops = {
bpf: Add map_meta_equal map ops Some properties of the inner map is used in the verification time. When an inner map is inserted to an outer map at runtime, bpf_map_meta_equal() is currently used to ensure those properties of the inserting inner map stays the same as the verification time. In particular, the current bpf_map_meta_equal() checks max_entries which turns out to be too restrictive for most of the maps which do not use max_entries during the verification time. It limits the use case that wants to replace a smaller inner map with a larger inner map. There are some maps do use max_entries during verification though. For example, the map_gen_lookup in array_map_ops uses the max_entries to generate the inline lookup code. To accommodate differences between maps, the map_meta_equal is added to bpf_map_ops. Each map-type can decide what to check when its map is used as an inner map during runtime. Also, some map types cannot be used as an inner map and they are currently black listed in bpf_map_meta_alloc() in map_in_map.c. It is not unusual that the new map types may not aware that such blacklist exists. This patch enforces an explicit opt-in and only allows a map to be used as an inner map if it has implemented the map_meta_equal ops. It is based on the discussion in [1]. All maps that support inner map has its map_meta_equal points to bpf_map_meta_equal in this patch. A later patch will relax the max_entries check for most maps. bpf_types.h counts 28 map types. This patch adds 23 ".map_meta_equal" by using coccinelle. -5 for BPF_MAP_TYPE_PROG_ARRAY BPF_MAP_TYPE_(PERCPU)_CGROUP_STORAGE BPF_MAP_TYPE_STRUCT_OPS BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY_OF_MAPS BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH_OF_MAPS The "if (inner_map->inner_map_meta)" check in bpf_map_meta_alloc() is moved such that the same error is returned. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200522022342.899756-1-kafai@fb.com/ Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200828011806.1970400-1-kafai@fb.com
2020-08-28 09:18:06 +08:00
.map_meta_equal = bpf_map_meta_equal,
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
.map_alloc = ringbuf_map_alloc,
.map_free = ringbuf_map_free,
.map_mmap = ringbuf_map_mmap,
.map_poll = ringbuf_map_poll,
.map_lookup_elem = ringbuf_map_lookup_elem,
.map_update_elem = ringbuf_map_update_elem,
.map_delete_elem = ringbuf_map_delete_elem,
.map_get_next_key = ringbuf_map_get_next_key,
.map_btf_name = "bpf_ringbuf_map",
.map_btf_id = &ringbuf_map_btf_id,
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
};
/* Given pointer to ring buffer record metadata and struct bpf_ringbuf itself,
* calculate offset from record metadata to ring buffer in pages, rounded
* down. This page offset is stored as part of record metadata and allows to
* restore struct bpf_ringbuf * from record pointer. This page offset is
* stored at offset 4 of record metadata header.
*/
static size_t bpf_ringbuf_rec_pg_off(struct bpf_ringbuf *rb,
struct bpf_ringbuf_hdr *hdr)
{
return ((void *)hdr - (void *)rb) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
}
/* Given pointer to ring buffer record header, restore pointer to struct
* bpf_ringbuf itself by using page offset stored at offset 4
*/
static struct bpf_ringbuf *
bpf_ringbuf_restore_from_rec(struct bpf_ringbuf_hdr *hdr)
{
unsigned long addr = (unsigned long)(void *)hdr;
unsigned long off = (unsigned long)hdr->pg_off << PAGE_SHIFT;
return (void*)((addr & PAGE_MASK) - off);
}
static void *__bpf_ringbuf_reserve(struct bpf_ringbuf *rb, u64 size)
{
unsigned long cons_pos, prod_pos, new_prod_pos, flags;
u32 len, pg_off;
struct bpf_ringbuf_hdr *hdr;
if (unlikely(size > RINGBUF_MAX_RECORD_SZ))
return NULL;
len = round_up(size + BPF_RINGBUF_HDR_SZ, 8);
if (len > rb->mask + 1)
return NULL;
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
cons_pos = smp_load_acquire(&rb->consumer_pos);
if (in_nmi()) {
if (!spin_trylock_irqsave(&rb->spinlock, flags))
return NULL;
} else {
spin_lock_irqsave(&rb->spinlock, flags);
}
prod_pos = rb->producer_pos;
new_prod_pos = prod_pos + len;
/* check for out of ringbuf space by ensuring producer position
* doesn't advance more than (ringbuf_size - 1) ahead
*/
if (new_prod_pos - cons_pos > rb->mask) {
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rb->spinlock, flags);
return NULL;
}
hdr = (void *)rb->data + (prod_pos & rb->mask);
pg_off = bpf_ringbuf_rec_pg_off(rb, hdr);
hdr->len = size | BPF_RINGBUF_BUSY_BIT;
hdr->pg_off = pg_off;
/* pairs with consumer's smp_load_acquire() */
smp_store_release(&rb->producer_pos, new_prod_pos);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&rb->spinlock, flags);
return (void *)hdr + BPF_RINGBUF_HDR_SZ;
}
BPF_CALL_3(bpf_ringbuf_reserve, struct bpf_map *, map, u64, size, u64, flags)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf_map *rb_map;
if (unlikely(flags))
return 0;
rb_map = container_of(map, struct bpf_ringbuf_map, map);
return (unsigned long)__bpf_ringbuf_reserve(rb_map->rb, size);
}
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_ringbuf_reserve_proto = {
.func = bpf_ringbuf_reserve,
.ret_type = RET_PTR_TO_ALLOC_MEM_OR_NULL,
.arg1_type = ARG_CONST_MAP_PTR,
.arg2_type = ARG_CONST_ALLOC_SIZE_OR_ZERO,
.arg3_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
};
static void bpf_ringbuf_commit(void *sample, u64 flags, bool discard)
{
unsigned long rec_pos, cons_pos;
struct bpf_ringbuf_hdr *hdr;
struct bpf_ringbuf *rb;
u32 new_len;
hdr = sample - BPF_RINGBUF_HDR_SZ;
rb = bpf_ringbuf_restore_from_rec(hdr);
new_len = hdr->len ^ BPF_RINGBUF_BUSY_BIT;
if (discard)
new_len |= BPF_RINGBUF_DISCARD_BIT;
/* update record header with correct final size prefix */
xchg(&hdr->len, new_len);
/* if consumer caught up and is waiting for our record, notify about
* new data availability
*/
rec_pos = (void *)hdr - (void *)rb->data;
cons_pos = smp_load_acquire(&rb->consumer_pos) & rb->mask;
if (flags & BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP)
irq_work_queue(&rb->work);
else if (cons_pos == rec_pos && !(flags & BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP))
irq_work_queue(&rb->work);
}
BPF_CALL_2(bpf_ringbuf_submit, void *, sample, u64, flags)
{
bpf_ringbuf_commit(sample, flags, false /* discard */);
return 0;
}
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_ringbuf_submit_proto = {
.func = bpf_ringbuf_submit,
.ret_type = RET_VOID,
.arg1_type = ARG_PTR_TO_ALLOC_MEM | OBJ_RELEASE,
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
.arg2_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
};
BPF_CALL_2(bpf_ringbuf_discard, void *, sample, u64, flags)
{
bpf_ringbuf_commit(sample, flags, true /* discard */);
return 0;
}
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_ringbuf_discard_proto = {
.func = bpf_ringbuf_discard,
.ret_type = RET_VOID,
.arg1_type = ARG_PTR_TO_ALLOC_MEM | OBJ_RELEASE,
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
.arg2_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
};
BPF_CALL_4(bpf_ringbuf_output, struct bpf_map *, map, void *, data, u64, size,
u64, flags)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf_map *rb_map;
void *rec;
if (unlikely(flags & ~(BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP | BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP)))
return -EINVAL;
rb_map = container_of(map, struct bpf_ringbuf_map, map);
rec = __bpf_ringbuf_reserve(rb_map->rb, size);
if (!rec)
return -EAGAIN;
memcpy(rec, data, size);
bpf_ringbuf_commit(rec, flags, false /* discard */);
return 0;
}
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_ringbuf_output_proto = {
.func = bpf_ringbuf_output,
.ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
.arg1_type = ARG_CONST_MAP_PTR,
.arg2_type = ARG_PTR_TO_MEM | MEM_RDONLY,
bpf: Implement BPF ring buffer and verifier support for it This commit adds a new MPSC ring buffer implementation into BPF ecosystem, which allows multiple CPUs to submit data to a single shared ring buffer. On the consumption side, only single consumer is assumed. Motivation ---------- There are two distinctive motivators for this work, which are not satisfied by existing perf buffer, which prompted creation of a new ring buffer implementation. - more efficient memory utilization by sharing ring buffer across CPUs; - preserving ordering of events that happen sequentially in time, even across multiple CPUs (e.g., fork/exec/exit events for a task). These two problems are independent, but perf buffer fails to satisfy both. Both are a result of a choice to have per-CPU perf ring buffer. Both can be also solved by having an MPSC implementation of ring buffer. The ordering problem could technically be solved for perf buffer with some in-kernel counting, but given the first one requires an MPSC buffer, the same solution would solve the second problem automatically. Semantics and APIs ------------------ Single ring buffer is presented to BPF programs as an instance of BPF map of type BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF. Two other alternatives considered, but ultimately rejected. One way would be to, similar to BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY, make BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF could represent an array of ring buffers, but not enforce "same CPU only" rule. This would be more familiar interface compatible with existing perf buffer use in BPF, but would fail if application needed more advanced logic to lookup ring buffer by arbitrary key. HASH_OF_MAPS addresses this with current approach. Additionally, given the performance of BPF ringbuf, many use cases would just opt into a simple single ring buffer shared among all CPUs, for which current approach would be an overkill. Another approach could introduce a new concept, alongside BPF map, to represent generic "container" object, which doesn't necessarily have key/value interface with lookup/update/delete operations. This approach would add a lot of extra infrastructure that has to be built for observability and verifier support. It would also add another concept that BPF developers would have to familiarize themselves with, new syntax in libbpf, etc. But then would really provide no additional benefits over the approach of using a map. BPF_MAP_TYPE_RINGBUF doesn't support lookup/update/delete operations, but so doesn't few other map types (e.g., queue and stack; array doesn't support delete, etc). The approach chosen has an advantage of re-using existing BPF map infrastructure (introspection APIs in kernel, libbpf support, etc), being familiar concept (no need to teach users a new type of object in BPF program), and utilizing existing tooling (bpftool). For common scenario of using a single ring buffer for all CPUs, it's as simple and straightforward, as would be with a dedicated "container" object. On the other hand, by being a map, it can be combined with ARRAY_OF_MAPS and HASH_OF_MAPS map-in-maps to implement a wide variety of topologies, from one ring buffer for each CPU (e.g., as a replacement for perf buffer use cases), to a complicated application hashing/sharding of ring buffers (e.g., having a small pool of ring buffers with hashed task's tgid being a look up key to preserve order, but reduce contention). Key and value sizes are enforced to be zero. max_entries is used to specify the size of ring buffer and has to be a power of 2 value. There are a bunch of similarities between perf buffer (BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERF_EVENT_ARRAY) and new BPF ring buffer semantics: - variable-length records; - if there is no more space left in ring buffer, reservation fails, no blocking; - memory-mappable data area for user-space applications for ease of consumption and high performance; - epoll notifications for new incoming data; - but still the ability to do busy polling for new data to achieve the lowest latency, if necessary. BPF ringbuf provides two sets of APIs to BPF programs: - bpf_ringbuf_output() allows to *copy* data from one place to a ring buffer, similarly to bpf_perf_event_output(); - bpf_ringbuf_reserve()/bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() APIs split the whole process into two steps. First, a fixed amount of space is reserved. If successful, a pointer to a data inside ring buffer data area is returned, which BPF programs can use similarly to a data inside array/hash maps. Once ready, this piece of memory is either committed or discarded. Discard is similar to commit, but makes consumer ignore the record. bpf_ringbuf_output() has disadvantage of incurring extra memory copy, because record has to be prepared in some other place first. But it allows to submit records of the length that's not known to verifier beforehand. It also closely matches bpf_perf_event_output(), so will simplify migration significantly. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoids the extra copy of memory by providing a memory pointer directly to ring buffer memory. In a lot of cases records are larger than BPF stack space allows, so many programs have use extra per-CPU array as a temporary heap for preparing sample. bpf_ringbuf_reserve() avoid this needs completely. But in exchange, it only allows a known constant size of memory to be reserved, such that verifier can verify that BPF program can't access memory outside its reserved record space. bpf_ringbuf_output(), while slightly slower due to extra memory copy, covers some use cases that are not suitable for bpf_ringbuf_reserve(). The difference between commit and discard is very small. Discard just marks a record as discarded, and such records are supposed to be ignored by consumer code. Discard is useful for some advanced use-cases, such as ensuring all-or-nothing multi-record submission, or emulating temporary malloc()/free() within single BPF program invocation. Each reserved record is tracked by verifier through existing reference-tracking logic, similar to socket ref-tracking. It is thus impossible to reserve a record, but forget to submit (or discard) it. bpf_ringbuf_query() helper allows to query various properties of ring buffer. Currently 4 are supported: - BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA returns amount of unconsumed data in ring buffer; - BPF_RB_RING_SIZE returns the size of ring buffer; - BPF_RB_CONS_POS/BPF_RB_PROD_POS returns current logical possition of consumer/producer, respectively. Returned values are momentarily snapshots of ring buffer state and could be off by the time helper returns, so this should be used only for debugging/reporting reasons or for implementing various heuristics, that take into account highly-changeable nature of some of those characteristics. One such heuristic might involve more fine-grained control over poll/epoll notifications about new data availability in ring buffer. Together with BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP/BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags for output/commit/discard helpers, it allows BPF program a high degree of control and, e.g., more efficient batched notifications. Default self-balancing strategy, though, should be adequate for most applications and will work reliable and efficiently already. Design and implementation ------------------------- This reserve/commit schema allows a natural way for multiple producers, either on different CPUs or even on the same CPU/in the same BPF program, to reserve independent records and work with them without blocking other producers. This means that if BPF program was interruped by another BPF program sharing the same ring buffer, they will both get a record reserved (provided there is enough space left) and can work with it and submit it independently. This applies to NMI context as well, except that due to using a spinlock during reservation, in NMI context, bpf_ringbuf_reserve() might fail to get a lock, in which case reservation will fail even if ring buffer is not full. The ring buffer itself internally is implemented as a power-of-2 sized circular buffer, with two logical and ever-increasing counters (which might wrap around on 32-bit architectures, that's not a problem): - consumer counter shows up to which logical position consumer consumed the data; - producer counter denotes amount of data reserved by all producers. Each time a record is reserved, producer that "owns" the record will successfully advance producer counter. At that point, data is still not yet ready to be consumed, though. Each record has 8 byte header, which contains the length of reserved record, as well as two extra bits: busy bit to denote that record is still being worked on, and discard bit, which might be set at commit time if record is discarded. In the latter case, consumer is supposed to skip the record and move on to the next one. Record header also encodes record's relative offset from the beginning of ring buffer data area (in pages). This allows bpf_ringbuf_commit()/bpf_ringbuf_discard() to accept only the pointer to the record itself, without requiring also the pointer to ring buffer itself. Ring buffer memory location will be restored from record metadata header. This significantly simplifies verifier, as well as improving API usability. Producer counter increments are serialized under spinlock, so there is a strict ordering between reservations. Commits, on the other hand, are completely lockless and independent. All records become available to consumer in the order of reservations, but only after all previous records where already committed. It is thus possible for slow producers to temporarily hold off submitted records, that were reserved later. Reservation/commit/consumer protocol is verified by litmus tests in Documentation/litmus-test/bpf-rb. One interesting implementation bit, that significantly simplifies (and thus speeds up as well) implementation of both producers and consumers is how data area is mapped twice contiguously back-to-back in the virtual memory. This allows to not take any special measures for samples that have to wrap around at the end of the circular buffer data area, because the next page after the last data page would be first data page again, and thus the sample will still appear completely contiguous in virtual memory. See comment and a simple ASCII diagram showing this visually in bpf_ringbuf_area_alloc(). Another feature that distinguishes BPF ringbuf from perf ring buffer is a self-pacing notifications of new data being availability. bpf_ringbuf_commit() implementation will send a notification of new record being available after commit only if consumer has already caught up right up to the record being committed. If not, consumer still has to catch up and thus will see new data anyways without needing an extra poll notification. Benchmarks (see tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_ringbuf.c) show that this allows to achieve a very high throughput without having to resort to tricks like "notify only every Nth sample", which are necessary with perf buffer. For extreme cases, when BPF program wants more manual control of notifications, commit/discard/output helpers accept BPF_RB_NO_WAKEUP and BPF_RB_FORCE_WAKEUP flags, which give full control over notifications of data availability, but require extra caution and diligence in using this API. Comparison to alternatives -------------------------- Before considering implementing BPF ring buffer from scratch existing alternatives in kernel were evaluated, but didn't seem to meet the needs. They largely fell into few categores: - per-CPU buffers (perf, ftrace, etc), which don't satisfy two motivations outlined above (ordering and memory consumption); - linked list-based implementations; while some were multi-producer designs, consuming these from user-space would be very complicated and most probably not performant; memory-mapping contiguous piece of memory is simpler and more performant for user-space consumers; - io_uring is SPSC, but also requires fixed-sized elements. Naively turning SPSC queue into MPSC w/ lock would have subpar performance compared to locked reserve + lockless commit, as with BPF ring buffer. Fixed sized elements would be too limiting for BPF programs, given existing BPF programs heavily rely on variable-sized perf buffer already; - specialized implementations (like a new printk ring buffer, [0]) with lots of printk-specific limitations and implications, that didn't seem to fit well for intended use with BPF programs. [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/779550/ Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200529075424.3139988-2-andriin@fb.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2020-05-29 15:54:20 +08:00
.arg3_type = ARG_CONST_SIZE_OR_ZERO,
.arg4_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
};
BPF_CALL_2(bpf_ringbuf_query, struct bpf_map *, map, u64, flags)
{
struct bpf_ringbuf *rb;
rb = container_of(map, struct bpf_ringbuf_map, map)->rb;
switch (flags) {
case BPF_RB_AVAIL_DATA:
return ringbuf_avail_data_sz(rb);
case BPF_RB_RING_SIZE:
return rb->mask + 1;
case BPF_RB_CONS_POS:
return smp_load_acquire(&rb->consumer_pos);
case BPF_RB_PROD_POS:
return smp_load_acquire(&rb->producer_pos);
default:
return 0;
}
}
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_ringbuf_query_proto = {
.func = bpf_ringbuf_query,
.ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
.arg1_type = ARG_CONST_MAP_PTR,
.arg2_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
};