Messages in this thread | | | From | Matteo Croce <> | Date | Fri, 20 Aug 2021 20:05:57 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next] stmmac: align RX buffers |
| |
On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 7:56 PM Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 7:51 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 18:35:45 +0100, > > Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 7:24 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 18:14:30 +0100, > > > > Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 7:09 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 17:38:14 +0100, > > > > > > Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 20, 2021 at 6:26 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 11:37:03 +0100, > > > > > > > > Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 6:29 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h > > > > > > > > > > index fcdb1d20389b..244aa6579ef4 100644 > > > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h > > > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac.h > > > > > > > > > > @@ -341,7 +341,7 @@ static inline unsigned int stmmac_rx_offset(struct stmmac_priv *priv) > > > > > > > > > > if (stmmac_xdp_is_enabled(priv)) > > > > > > > > > > return XDP_PACKET_HEADROOM + NET_IP_ALIGN; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - return NET_SKB_PAD + NET_IP_ALIGN; > > > > > > > > > > + return 8 + NET_IP_ALIGN; > > > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > void stmmac_disable_rx_queue(struct stmmac_priv *priv, u32 queue); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see the system corrupting packets anymore. Is that exactly > > > > > > > > > > what you had in mind? This really seems to point to a basic buffer > > > > > > > > > > overflow. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I meant something like: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - return NET_SKB_PAD + NET_IP_ALIGN; > > > > > > > > > + return 8; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I had some hardware which DMA fails if the receive buffer was not word > > > > > > > > > aligned, but this seems not the case, as 8 + NET_IP_ALIGN = 10, and > > > > > > > > > it's not aligned too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No error in that case either, as expected. Given that NET_SKB_PAD is > > > > > > > > likely to expand to 64, it is likely a DMA buffer overflow which > > > > > > > > probably only triggers for large-ish packets. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, we're almost at -rc7, and we don't have a solution in sight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can we please revert this until we have an understanding of what is > > > > > > > > happening? I'll hopefully have more cycles to work on the issue once > > > > > > > > 5.14 is out, and hopefully the maintainers of this driver can chime in > > > > > > > > (they have been pretty quiet so far). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > M. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Last try, what about adding only NET_IP_ALIGN and leaving NET_SKB_PAD? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - return NET_SKB_PAD + NET_IP_ALIGN; > > > > > > > + return NET_IP_ALIGN; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think that alloc_skb adds another NET_SKB_PAD anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see any packet corruption with this. However, this doesn't > > > > > > prove that this is correct either. What was the rational for adding > > > > > > NET_SKB_PAD the first place? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think it's wrong. The original offset was 0, and to align it to the > > > > > boundary we need to add just NET_IP_ALIGN, which is two. > > > > > NET_SKB_PAD is a much bigger value, (I think 64), which is used to > > > > > reserve space to prepend an header, e.g. with tunnels. > > > > > > > > How about the other adjustments that Eric mentioned regarding the size > > > > of the buffer? Aren't they required? > > > > > > > > > > I guess that if stmmac_rx_buf1_len() needed such adjustment, it would > > > be already broken when XDP is in use. > > > When you use XDP, stmmac_rx_offset() adds a pretty big headroom of 256 > > > byte, which would easily trigger an overflow if not accounted. > > > Did you try attaching a simple XDP program on a stock 5.13 kernel? > > > > Yes, as mentioned in [1], to which you replied... > > > > M. > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/87wnohqty1.wl-maz@kernel.org > > > > Great. > So I doubt that the adjustment is needed. > Does it work with all the frame size? >
Last check, are you sure that the bpf program was loaded in the driver and not as generic XDP? You can force it as native with "xdpdrv":
ip link set eth xdpdrv object kernel_passall.o
-- per aspera ad upstream
| |