[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/3] lib/lpm: integrate RCU QSBR

[David Marchand]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:03 AM Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang at arm.com> wrote:
>
> Currently, the tbl8 group is freed even though the readers might be
> using the tbl8 group entries. The freed tbl8 group can be reallocated
> quickly. This results in incorrect lookup results.
>
> RCU QSBR process is integrated for safe tbl8 group reclaim.
> Refer to RCU documentation to understand various aspects of
> integrating RCU library into other libraries.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ruifeng Wang <ruifeng.wang at arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Honnappa Nagarahalli <honnappa.nagarahalli at arm.com>
> ---
>  doc/guides/prog_guide/lpm_lib.rst  |  32 +++++++
>  lib/librte_lpm/Makefile            |   2 +-
>  lib/librte_lpm/meson.build         |   1 +
>  lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c           | 129 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h           |  59 +++++++++++++
>  lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm_version.map |   6 ++
>  6 files changed, 216 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/doc/guides/prog_guide/lpm_lib.rst b/doc/guides/prog_guide/lpm_lib.rst
> index 1609a57d0..7cc99044a 100644
> --- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/lpm_lib.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/lpm_lib.rst
> @@ -145,6 +145,38 @@ depending on whether we need to move to the next table or not.
>  Prefix expansion is one of the keys of this algorithm,
>  since it improves the speed dramatically by adding redundancy.
>
> +Deletion
> +~~~~~~~~
> +
> +When deleting a rule, a replacement rule is searched for. Replacement rule is an existing rule that has
> +the longest prefix match with the rule to be deleted, but has smaller depth.
> +
> +If a replacement rule is found, target tbl24 and tbl8 entries are updated to have the same depth and next hop
> +value with the replacement rule.
> +
> +If no replacement rule can be found, target tbl24 and tbl8 entries will be cleared.
> +
> +Prefix expansion is performed if the rule's depth is not exactly 24 bits or 32 bits.
> +
> +After deleting a rule, a group of tbl8s that belongs to the same tbl24 entry are freed in following cases:
> +
> +*   All tbl8s in the group are empty .
> +
> +*   All tbl8s in the group have the same values and with depth no greater than 24.
> +
> +Free of tbl8s have different behaviors:
> +
> +*   If RCU is not used, tbl8s are cleared and reclaimed immediately.
> +
> +*   If RCU is used, tbl8s are reclaimed when readers are in quiescent state.
> +
> +When the LPM is not using RCU, tbl8 group can be freed immediately even though the readers might be using
> +the tbl8 group entries. This might result in incorrect lookup results.
> +
> +RCU QSBR process is integrated for safe tbl8 group reclaimation. Application has certain responsibilities
> +while using this feature. Please refer to resource reclaimation framework of :ref:`RCU library <RCU_Library>`
> +for more details.
> +

Would the lpm6 library benefit from the same?
Asking as I do not see much code shared between lpm and lpm6.

[...]

> diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> index 38ab512a4..41e9c49b8 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.c
> @@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
>  /* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>   * Copyright(c) 2010-2014 Intel Corporation
> + * Copyright(c) 2020 Arm Limited
>   */
>
>  #include <string.h>
> @@ -245,13 +246,84 @@ rte_lpm_free(struct rte_lpm *lpm)
>                 TAILQ_REMOVE(lpm_list, te, next);
>
>         rte_mcfg_tailq_write_unlock();
> -
> +#ifdef ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API
> +       if (lpm->dq)
> +               rte_rcu_qsbr_dq_delete(lpm->dq);
> +#endif

All DPDK code under lib/ is compiled with the ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API flag set.
There is no need to protect against this flag in rte_lpm.c.

[...]

> diff --git a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h
> index b9d49ac87..7889f21b3 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_lpm/rte_lpm.h

> @@ -130,6 +143,28 @@ struct rte_lpm {
>                         __rte_cache_aligned; /**< LPM tbl24 table. */
>         struct rte_lpm_tbl_entry *tbl8; /**< LPM tbl8 table. */
>         struct rte_lpm_rule *rules_tbl; /**< LPM rules. */
> +#ifdef ALLOW_EXPERIMENTAL_API
> +       /* RCU config. */
> +       struct rte_rcu_qsbr *v;         /* RCU QSBR variable. */
> +       enum rte_lpm_qsbr_mode rcu_mode;/* Blocking, defer queue. */
> +       struct rte_rcu_qsbr_dq *dq;     /* RCU QSBR defer queue. */
> +#endif
> +};

This is more a comment/question for the lpm maintainers.

Afaics, the rte_lpm structure is exported/public because of lookup
which is inlined.
But most of the structure can be hidden and stored in a private
structure that would embed the exposed rte_lpm.
The slowpath functions would only have to translate from publicly
exposed to internal representation (via container_of).

This patch could do this and be the first step to hide the unneeded
exposure of other fields (later/in 20.11 ?).

Thoughts?


-- 
David Marchand