From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.214.176 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793855658; b=s3OOFd+IsqB+BWVRQwiqjhrZK0G4spdwXPxNSSJNxTB/Waw13lx4xVrOgRxmA2MrfrNL 1pH9vJUILYA4Al+SYJPz8d28nmO1AyQfpewIuapiQu5aQTIAKOWlviM9UFiW++1hEjDIC zjGzUW7J7FRAnUTS/gYkn7omD2/PDmzFCVUwtc9rnHWCzNgVO0BPSwUZkzj0BYTy41ntV lg5yHXbMLbs6pawAnYhFqg/74uKjMw0oXD5H4eo+EFwboS5NpBnGaoOaffHWX65jUAx4/ Oneen2lTt3vwYR3xoS4k/aCD9iRNOWJ8jRBeEJpcEy+JihfAAhfE1TMfi6wVCVG/PLA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793855658; h=DMARC-Filter:Received:DKIM-Signature:X-Google-DKIM-Signature: X-Forwarded-Encrypted:X-Gm-Message-State:X-Gm-Gg:X-Received:Received: Mime-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id: To:Cc:Subject:From:X-Mailer:References:In-Reply-To; bh=/dNLoK8eolfJkj1an88i/VPdEv8gehRvTnLhDc4kaqU=; b=Ahgo0seFVkikBr8LTkAI/jjJuq5HjZP+8gSGxLYk4OYyv34SklXZvRvZ1cFUzQ+i07JK /AKmTiYvQP4rjQgcoud6D5YqSuRZiWJP+LQs1Fx4BTdrmsxWY9UJa1EF3aJxrFQ2NPYSs zKXuBwERNJCrwGzRi7xiHI/1d5EhQe+MCqYs8lv6asINlAtfDK5STtmEbRwq+9Ihbdw9b vc0lj8zZariBjeL/oDgCYpkYUDtEKYRhtysjf9nKgDaGPzkXNfOtHYOx3bGndM8U32CnS 2i19snsJmHoxEqx8mrsw75Ejfaj6TtlWIGNldAlAVL329RbaWoTZamJhUDOrZ5DZk3A== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20260707 header.b=wmpmO1aN; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=209.85.214.176 Received: from mail-pl1-f176.google.com (mail-pl1-f176.google.com [209.85.214.176]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F4BF606A328 for ; Thu, 5 Nov 2026 05:14:18 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org 7F4BF606A328 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20260707 header.b=wmpmO1aN Received: by mail-pl1-f176.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2ea7987517aso8370925ad.0 for ; Wed, 04 Nov 2026 21:14:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20260707; t=1793855658; x=1794460458; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:references:from:subject:cc:to:message-id:date :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=/dNLoK8eolfJkj1an88i/VPdEv8gehRvTnLhDc4kaqU=; b=wmpmO1aNcXZo6fYqQBuOI8WyNSidCMIjF0MAWyjOg45Ff9KVA85lXzdGf8TT2kIwnA nwq+Flrd6vzgzgcbVpSkwymojlv9nCXBLVP7Bn18JFDCMW5BrDjyR4b4ectKrsExjfFb X7Kx5aqb8xzIa+/BR7GpBv/cO7hhWp/zvbd9KiowAV1LZ4H2zIrh2LCMjKngCTKDAJR8 aPoLtBo8QPyyZi8JNfITn5/0XGy3xijE8aceN5ANa3znno7CqkydXB1RzsPmz/XTy2l6 RnET+OvMMZImCKwBJD1w3TmIiR3x1utzV1CpNECmK0ygR123cwPnzKxU1SR2tLhvNRBs KjGA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1793855658; x=1794460458; h=in-reply-to:references:from:subject:cc:to:message-id:date :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=/dNLoK8eolfJkj1an88i/VPdEv8gehRvTnLhDc4kaqU=; b=EQB0KB1JbzrM1wGB44P4TlegCQ0FdlXZXIqNSq2vRS4rety74yR0ijGJCjeaXv6OTf El8FgkVTqf7qiXujw7J5NlG6nWb1o/mHcyx4hZT5sJCD86zvypcbfRMY6Pjt6ibpDhCn eyusYdlWUgEEtPjkEY2g8rZtopqxHROAedsCR3qUMpQEg2+GErvVRehqIs+atpN/l6UJ Xmv2BZBr23360EJ6jhBaN/29krtI8gT/T/VGJAh6TWLLLjyGP2MeFCocTShkHZAwEqv1 QWT1X6cOT8IGkQrA6uYLG68R0PLZcF0bkwXhqNujaeboKQdeiNNsBADpo3rfgCx0bvLD 8OYg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvByeiUnx50HS8xd5vuOgN08pUkmhnHP/stCRfN/w1o2kGXWiUPQ82B4XEH+2widqmt9fxQGgK6YVlT00v1c=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: APuU4Z/1u0Wot4m2FO+kVcEyrBZsz5+obcllFtzLa7ICXq4CnTwmJyko FSgFbo/os473ScF1uGWM23g1KlpnxnAfAWJu7WaD1H8+NHy16ebDb4ZF X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou0KfOjHhiOhw3tsiTVv3J+s6+Bm/wK7TciaRAydKcq1yCOxduERcojEjKiGMxT gjQXBifmawRwFQwb6kN/SSj0X+GplA5bTAIkk454yVulNnUIlcZ7h4Dodyjc6XJfT/ubsueAAjJ NnAZ2MviBHBSXnPsgEHb04Q6/66Tm+/wC2YETgA2TAvnVhKKRxrJPWS2BvI+7jPO+/oS1+IuCwa UkJrMtIQsmPZ542n7xaO44Zz4DC1s+VsIikbEwQkP6EBxus+958uWws2GitpCpN+mk19jvOe2lQ BBYms6SPcCzaS2PbJesLVVTBdZPcQGiexOp2RhiX8Re74zzpwtKWuaVIwx0guZJQ0xh4g0KPmNR 3RgjWa56RXheq4l2IlDCklvsQpuwygHCxgNdXsZ36thvJLzr4NN6W0A2FkZH9JyiCe7pMS57rq8 iekMv8ajfFcLboPHJrIwcbefQhWDCtq5Y4SKjyCKPDeumN1QNxaVsJwR4b0Lv4gtHtrk0zGcm2c UA/AfI7tQW2ZxJes1Q4wM1UuiiBNJPyO/eayS8eGu8hc5h01T5qZRHvG2pYO/k0KkVIE+7oYueG t7NYXvGFxTwt+6eKL4aERfiuuaV4hXWEfOZvTBNPWcFopd9RaIeNGNezfxWOow7vuTiQMydrjsK AROLcK4FFFcMaDhUeO6ksD1OIvLkYYojNTIE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d485:b0:2dd:c053:a6ee with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-2eb364ce5e3mr166128155ad.32.1793855657678; Wed, 04 Nov 2026 21:14:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([153.61.198.248]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-2ed0910faaasm13103375ad.47.2026.11.04.21.14.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 04 Nov 2026 21:14:17 -0800 (PST) X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2026 05:14:16 +0000 Message-Id: To: "Mike Bazov" Cc: "JP Kobryn" , "Daniel Borkmann" , "Andrii Nakryiko" , "Martin KaFai Lau" , "Eduard Zingerman" , "Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi" , "Song Liu" , "Yonghong Song" , "Jiri Olsa" , "John Fastabend" , "Shuah Khan" , , , Subject: Re: [EXT.MSG] Re: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/2] bpf: Do not let preemption cause false recursion drops in trampoline progs From: "Alexei Starovoitov" X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.1-355-gf870624f6c37 References: <20261025-b4-bpf-trampoline-preempt-v1-0-198dcdc0c6ac@sentinelone.com> In-Reply-To: On Thu Nov 5, 2026 at 12:12 AM UTC, Mike Bazov wrote: > On Wed, Nov 04, 2026 at 02:20 AM Alexei Starovoitov > wrote: > > Add bpf_preempt_disable(). > > Your test forces the preemption in the middle of the prog. > > Explicit bpf_preempt_disable() will fix it. > > I tried it, and with the whole prog body wrapped in bpf_preempt_disabl= e() / > bpf_preempt_enable(), Task B is still skipped in every round (on a 7.0 > kernel, 20 rounds, fentry and fexit: runs_b=3D0, recursion_misses=3D20= ). > > perf record -e sched:sched_switch -g shows where Task A is switched ou= t > now, 20 of 20 (Task A, SCHED_OTHER, preempted by Task B, SCHED_FIFO): > > __schedule+0x48f > preempt_schedule+0x59 > preempt_schedule_thunk+0x16 > bpf_preempt_enable+0x1c > bpf_trampoline_6442539626+0x105 > bpf_prog_7dd04eadc26e277d_on_fentry+0x11 > bpf_trampoline_6442539626+0x192 > __set_task_comm+0x5 > > That is still inside the prog, while prog->active is held. Right. Pls hack bpf_preempt_enable() to use preempt_enable_no_resched(). I think recursion misses may disappear or become single digit. If it's good enough we can quickly add bpf_preempt_enable_no_resched() kfun= c. Also try NO_HRTICK in /sys/kernel/debug/sched/features. That may be decent workaround for now. > > What are run_cnt and recursion_misses of your progs on inet_sendmsg(= ) > > and inet_recvmsg() in production? > > We hit this while testing new distros with 7.0 kernels, so we don't > have fleet numbers for these counters yet. For our inet_sendmsg/recvms= g > progs, in testing: fentry/fexit on inet[6]_{send,recv}msg, Ubuntu 24.0= 4 > with its stock 7.0 HWE kernel (7.0.0-38-generic, default lazy > preemption, 4 vCPUs), behind nginx -> gunicorn -> redis, with wrk from > another machine (128 keep-alive connections, ~1.07M requests over 10 > minutes, ~62% CPU): > > run_cnt 38040015, recursion_misses 4063 hmm. you really cannot tolerate that small drop? it's tracing at the end. It would be a different story if such drops were on lsm hook. let's try to think how per-task counter would work. I'm guessing 128 connections is 128 threads servicing them, so 200 cpus will be hammering the same per-task counter which will cause real perf loss. Gotta do better than per-task. Also it needs to be per-task + per-prog. How will it look like?