From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] virtio_net: fix PAGE_SIZE > 64k
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:48:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58882023.8060801@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170124235101-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
On 17-01-24 01:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 04:10:46PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> This works in the regimen that XDP packets always live in exactly one
>> page. That will be needed to mmap the RX ring into userspace, and it
>> helps make adjust_header trivial as well.
I still don't see why this is a hard requirement for mmap let me post
some patches later tonight to show how we do this with af_packet.
>
> I think the point was to avoid resets across xdp attach/detach. If we
> are doing resets now, we could do whatever buffering we want. We could
> also just disable mergeable buffers for that matter.
>
>> MTU 1500, PAGESIZE >= 4096, so a headroom of 256 is no problem, and
>> we still have enough tailroom for skb_shared_info should we wrap
>> the buffer into a real SKB and push it into the stack.
>>
>> If you are trying to do buffering differently for virtio_net, well...
>> that's a self inflicted wound as far as I can tell.
>
> Right but I was wondering about the fact that this makes XDP_PASS
> much slower than processing skbs without XDP, as truesize is huge
> so we'll quickly run out of rmem space.
>
> When XDP is used to fight DOS attacks, why isn't this a concern?
>
It is a concern on my side. I want XDP and Linux stack to work
reasonably well together.
.John
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jasowang@redhat.com,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] virtio_net: fix PAGE_SIZE > 64k
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:48:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58882023.8060801@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170124235101-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
On 17-01-24 01:56 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 04:10:46PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> This works in the regimen that XDP packets always live in exactly one
>> page. That will be needed to mmap the RX ring into userspace, and it
>> helps make adjust_header trivial as well.
I still don't see why this is a hard requirement for mmap let me post
some patches later tonight to show how we do this with af_packet.
>
> I think the point was to avoid resets across xdp attach/detach. If we
> are doing resets now, we could do whatever buffering we want. We could
> also just disable mergeable buffers for that matter.
>
>> MTU 1500, PAGESIZE >= 4096, so a headroom of 256 is no problem, and
>> we still have enough tailroom for skb_shared_info should we wrap
>> the buffer into a real SKB and push it into the stack.
>>
>> If you are trying to do buffering differently for virtio_net, well...
>> that's a self inflicted wound as far as I can tell.
>
> Right but I was wondering about the fact that this makes XDP_PASS
> much slower than processing skbs without XDP, as truesize is huge
> so we'll quickly run out of rmem space.
>
> When XDP is used to fight DOS attacks, why isn't this a concern?
>
It is a concern on my side. I want XDP and Linux stack to work
reasonably well together.
.John
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-25 3:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-23 19:37 [PATCH v2] virtio_net: fix PAGE_SIZE > 64k Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-23 19:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 19:42 ` David Miller
2017-01-24 19:42 ` David Miller
2017-01-24 19:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 19:53 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 20:09 ` David Miller
2017-01-24 20:45 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 20:53 ` David Miller
2017-01-24 20:53 ` David Miller
2017-01-24 21:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 21:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 21:10 ` David Miller
2017-01-24 21:10 ` David Miller
2017-01-24 21:56 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 21:56 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-25 3:48 ` John Fastabend [this message]
2017-01-25 3:48 ` John Fastabend
2017-01-24 20:45 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-24 20:09 ` David Miller
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-01-25 4:07 Alexei Starovoitov
2017-01-25 14:23 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-25 14:23 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2017-01-25 4:07 Alexei Starovoitov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=58882023.8060801@gmail.com \
--to=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.