From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Wang Zhan <wang.zhan@smartx.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org, keyong.sun@smartx.com,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowangio@gmail.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com>,
Eelco Chaudron <echaudro@redhat.com>,
Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@ovn.org>,
dev@openvswitch.org, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@google.com>,
Alice Mikityanska <alice@isovalent.com>,
David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>,
Wang Zhan <wang.zhan@smartx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/5] net: core: resegment oversized TCP GSO skbs
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 19:47:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <willemdebruijn.kernel.3b556463ed93f@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260928044102.1004310-5-wang.zhan@smartx.com>
Wang Zhan wrote:
> A GSO skb which exceeds an egress device limit loses its GSO feature mask
> and is segmented into individual packets. This is unnecessarily expensive
> when the device can still offload smaller TCP GSO skbs, which is easy to
> hit once one hop of a BIG TCP path raises gso_max_size and the next one
> does not.
>
> For an unencapsulated TCP GSO skb which exceeds gso_max_size or
> gso_max_segs, work out how many MSS segments each output skb may carry and
> resegment the skb with that max_segs bound instead. Encapsulated and
> frag-list skbs, GSO types the device cannot offload and bounds which leave
> room for a single MSS keep today's segmentation. The output obeys the GSO
> feature and limit contract the device already advertises, so it applies
> automatically, without extra device state or a userspace control.
>
> The output is a plain GSO skb, so its whole length lands in the 16-bit L3
> length field which inet_gso_segment() and ipv6_gso_segment() write. An
> egress limit above 64 KiB would give outputs whose length truncates, so
> the size limit is also capped at what that field can express.
>
> The helper runs on the skb which is handed to the driver, after
> validate_xmit_vlan() and sk_validate_xmit_skb(), and only from the
> netif_needs_gso() branch, so an skb which is not segmented pays nothing.
> An over-limit skb pays one device limit test and one ndo_features_check()
> for the bound, in exchange for keeping the output a GSO skb.
>
> Measured on a veth -> bridge -> TAP -> guest virtio-net path, with BIG TCP
> enabled on the veth endpoints and left off in the guest, so the skbs which
> the veth hop accepts have to be segmented before the TAP device. A single
> iperf3 TCP flow, six alternating runs per state (`-t 15 -O 5`, fixed CPU
> affinity and port tuple). The middle column is the same tree with the
> resegmentation disabled:
>
> protocol no BIG TCP mixed, no reseg mixed, resegmented
> TCP/IPv4 51.550 Gbps 15.850 Gbps 52.617 Gbps
> TCP/IPv6 52.050 Gbps 15.783 Gbps 51.933 Gbps
>
> Coefficient of variation for the two mixed columns was 0.48% and 0.82% for
> IPv4 and 0.44% and 0.44% for IPv6. A BIG TCP hop which feeds a 64 KiB hop
> loses 69% of the throughput of a path which never enables BIG TCP at all;
> bounded resegmentation recovers it, 3.3x over the existing segmentation
> path and within noise of the no BIG TCP baseline.
>
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Signed-off-by: Wang Zhan <wang.zhan@smartx.com>
>
> ---
> v3:
> - the L3 protocol change moved to patch 1
> - fold skb_can_gso_resegment() into the helper, now skb_gso_output_max_segs()
> - pass the caller's features on unchanged, the bound only shapes the output
> - drop the scatter-gather and checksum tests skb_segment() applies itself
> - saturate the size limit with min(), drop the sub-MSS guard
> - cap the output size at GSO_LEGACY_MAX_SIZE, these outputs are not BIG TCP
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/20260918084651.3022878-4-wang.zhan@smartx.com/
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/20260917063854.2011613-4-wang.zhan@smartx.com/
> ---
> net/core/dev.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> index d66b667071837..728260772f349 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -3933,6 +3933,63 @@ netdev_features_t netif_skb_features(struct sk_buff *skb)
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(netif_skb_features);
>
> +static unsigned int
> +skb_gso_output_max_segs(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> +{
> + unsigned int mss = skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size;
> + unsigned int gso_max_size, hdr_len, max_segs;
> + netdev_features_t features;
> + struct tcphdr _tcph, *th;
> +
> + /*
> + * The TCP frag-list path segments through skb_segment_list(), which
> + * does not carry max_segs, so bounded calls skip those skbs.
> + */
This comment answers only one of six conditions. And one that is
pretty straightforward. I'd drop.
In general, drop all too-obvious comments. AI has a habit of adding
a lot more, and more low information, comments than is customary in
kernel code (where we also have commit messages). Generally, repeating
what the code does is of little value.
> + if (!skb_is_gso(skb) || !skb_is_gso_tcp(skb) ||
> + skb->encapsulation || skb_has_frag_list(skb) ||
> + !skb_mac_header_was_set(skb) ||
> + !skb_transport_header_was_set(skb))
Conversely, they last two conditions are less obvious. Are they not
always true for a TSO packet?
> + return 0;
> +
> + th = skb_header_pointer(skb, skb_transport_offset(skb), sizeof(_tcph),
> + &_tcph);
> + if (!th || th->doff < sizeof(*th) / 4)
> + return 0;
> +
> + hdr_len = skb_transport_header(skb) - skb_mac_header(skb) +
> + th->doff * 4;
> +
> + /*
> + * The output stays a GSO skb, so the device has to offload the GSO
> + * type. The caller's features cannot tell that: this skb is over
> + * the device limits, so gso_features_check() has cleared their GSO
> + * bits. Compute the features again without the limit checks.
> + */
> + features = __netif_skb_features(skb, false);
> + if (!net_gso_ok(features | NETIF_F_GSO_ROBUST,
> + skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type))
> + return 0;
> +
> + /*
> + * The output is a plain GSO skb, so its whole length lands in the
> + * 16-bit L3 length field: only a BIG TCP skb may exceed the legacy
> + * GSO size, and this path does not emit one.
> + */
> + gso_max_size = netif_get_gso_max_size(dev, vlan_get_protocol(skb));
Third time this is now called in validate_xmit_skb. Not sure if that can
easily be avoided.
> + gso_max_size = min(gso_max_size, GSO_LEGACY_MAX_SIZE);
> +
> + /*
> + * gso_within_dev_limits() accepts gso_segs == gso_max_segs but
> + * rejects skb->len >= gso_max_size, so only the size bound needs - 1.
> + * The min() keeps that subtraction from wrapping when the device
> + * limit is smaller than the headers.
> + */
> + max_segs = (gso_max_size - min(gso_max_size, hdr_len + 1)) / mss;
> + max_segs = min(max_segs, READ_ONCE(dev->gso_max_segs));
> +
> + return max_segs;
> +}
> +
> static int xmit_one(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev,
> struct netdev_queue *txq, bool more)
> {
> @@ -4097,9 +4154,13 @@ static struct sk_buff *validate_xmit_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device
> goto out_null;
>
> if (netif_needs_gso(skb, features)) {
> + unsigned int max_segs = 0;
> struct sk_buff *segs;
>
> - segs = skb_gso_segment(skb, features);
> + if (unlikely(!gso_within_dev_limits(skb, dev)))
> + max_segs = skb_gso_output_max_segs(skb, dev);
> +
> + segs = __skb_gso_segment(skb, features, true, max_segs);
> if (IS_ERR(segs)) {
> goto out_kfree_skb;
> } else if (segs) {
> --
> 2.47.3
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-28 23:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-28 4:40 [PATCH net-next v3 0/5] net: resegment oversized TCP GSO skbs Wang Zhan
2026-09-28 4:40 ` [PATCH net-next v3 1/5] net: core: use the packet's L3 protocol for the GSO size limit Wang Zhan
2026-09-28 23:36 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-29 3:44 ` Wang Zhan
2026-09-29 4:01 ` Wang Zhan
2026-09-29 14:59 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-28 4:40 ` [PATCH net-next v3 2/5] net: core: factor out the GSO device limit check Wang Zhan
2026-09-28 23:37 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-29 7:47 ` Paolo Abeni
2026-09-28 4:41 ` [PATCH net-next v3 3/5] net: gso: support bounded TCP segmentation Wang Zhan
2026-09-28 23:39 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-30 4:41 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-28 4:41 ` [PATCH net-next v3 4/5] net: core: resegment oversized TCP GSO skbs Wang Zhan
2026-09-28 23:47 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2026-09-29 10:25 ` Wang Zhan
2026-09-29 15:00 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-30 4:41 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-28 4:41 ` [PATCH net-next v3 5/5] net: net_test: add tests for bounded GSO segmentation Wang Zhan
2026-09-28 23:59 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-29 10:30 ` Wang Zhan
2026-09-29 15:01 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-30 4:41 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-28 4:45 ` [PATCH net-next v3 0/5] net: resegment oversized TCP GSO skbs netdev-bot+sinfo
2026-09-28 5:49 ` Wang Zhan
2026-09-28 23:34 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-09-29 7:27 ` Paolo Abeni
2026-09-29 11:50 ` Wang Zhan
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=willemdebruijn.kernel.3b556463ed93f@gmail.com \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=aconole@redhat.com \
--cc=alice@isovalent.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=dev@openvswitch.org \
--cc=echaudro@redhat.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=i.maximets@ovn.org \
--cc=jasowangio@gmail.com \
--cc=keyong.sun@smartx.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=wang.zhan@smartx.com \
/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.