Re: [RFC] tcp_bbr2: use correct 64-bit division

From: Neal Cardwell
Date: Tue May 24 2022 - 16:06:21 EST


On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 4:01 AM David Laight <David.Laight@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Oleksandr Natalenko
> > Sent: 22 May 2022 23:30
> > To: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Hello Neal.
> >
> > It was reported to me [1] by Konstantin (in Cc) that BBRv2 code suffers from integer division issue on
> > 32 bit systems.
>
> Do any of these divisions ever actually have 64bit operands?
> Even on x86-64 64bit divide is significantly slower than 32bit divide.
>
> It is quite clear that x * 8 / 1000 is the same as x / (1000 / 8).
> So promoting to 64bit cannot be needed.
>
> David

The sk->sk_pacing_rate can definitely be bigger than 32 bits if the
network path can support more than 34 Gbit/sec (a pacing rate of 2^32
bytes per sec is roughly 34 Gibt/sec). This definitely happens.

So this one seems reasonable to me (and is only in debug code, so the
performance is probably fine):
- (u64)sk->sk_pacing_rate * 8 / 1000,
+ div_u64((u64)sk->sk_pacing_rate * 8, 1000),

For the other two I agree we should rework them to avoid the 64-bit
divide, since we don't need it.

There is similar logic in mainline Linux in tcp_tso_autosize(), which
is currently using "unsigned long" for bytes.

Eric, what do you advise?

thanks,
neal