From: "Gustavo F. Padovan" <gustavo@padovan.org>
To: Mat Martineau <mathewm@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org, marcel@holtmann.org,
rshaffer@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/7] Bluetooth: Add FCS awareness to L2CAP HCI fragmentation.
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:41:32 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100813154132.GA3323@vigoh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1008121626340.8460@linux-sea-02>
Hi Mat,
* Mat Martineau <mathewm@codeaurora.org> [2010-08-12 16:36:57 -0700]:
>
>
> On Wed, 11 Aug 2010, Gustavo F. Padovan wrote:
>
> >Hi Mat,
> >
> >* Gustavo F. Padovan <gustavo@padovan.org> [2010-08-11 00:35:41 -0300]:
> >
> >>* Mat Martineau <mathewm@codeaurora.org> [2010-08-10 12:15:00 -0700]:
> >>
> >>>In order to not limit ERTM and streaming mode PDUs to the HCI MTU
> >>>size, L2CAP must be able to split PDUs in to multple HCI fragments.
> >>>This is done by allocating space for the FCS in the last fragment.
> >>>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Mat Martineau <mathewm@codeaurora.org>
> >>>---
> >>> net/bluetooth/l2cap.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >>> 1 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>>diff --git a/net/bluetooth/l2cap.c b/net/bluetooth/l2cap.c
> >>>index aa69c84..b485c4a 100644
> >>>--- a/net/bluetooth/l2cap.c
> >>>+++ b/net/bluetooth/l2cap.c
> >>>@@ -1664,31 +1664,63 @@ static inline int l2cap_skbuff_fromiovec(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, in
> >>> {
> >>> struct l2cap_conn *conn = l2cap_pi(sk)->conn;
> >>> struct sk_buff **frag;
> >>>+ struct sk_buff *final;
> >>> int err, sent = 0;
> >>>
> >>>+ BT_DBG("sk %p, msg %p, len %d, count %d, skb %p", sk,
> >>>+ msg, (int)len, (int)count, skb);
> >>>+
> >>> if (memcpy_fromiovec(skb_put(skb, count), msg->msg_iov, count))
> >>> return -EFAULT;
> >>>
> >>> sent += count;
> >>> len -= count;
> >>>+ final = skb;
> >>>
> >>> /* Continuation fragments (no L2CAP header) */
> >>> frag = &skb_shinfo(skb)->frag_list;
> >>> while (len) {
> >>>+ int skblen;
> >>> count = min_t(unsigned int, conn->mtu, len);
> >>>
> >>>- *frag = bt_skb_send_alloc(sk, count, msg->msg_flags & MSG_DONTWAIT, &err);
> >>>+ /* Add room for the FCS if it fits */
> >>>+ if (l2cap_pi(sk)->fcs == L2CAP_FCS_CRC16 &&
> >>>+ len + L2CAP_FCS_SIZE <= conn->mtu)
> >>
> >>You don't need to check for (len + L2CAP_FCS_SIZE <= conn=mtu) here.
> >>Section 5.1 point that:
> >>
> >>"Unlike the B-Frame length field, the I-frame length field may be greater
> >>than the configured MTU because it includes the octet lengths of the
> >>Control, L2CAP SDU Length (when present), and frame check sequence
> >>fields as well as the Information octets."
> >>
> >>From that I understand "len <=" and not "len + L2CAP_FCS_SIZE <="
> >
> >So here you might want to the check if we support FCS, and then add 2 to
> >skblen.
>
> That's what the code does, without violating the HCI MTU.
Yes, you are right!
>
> >>>+ skblen = count + L2CAP_FCS_SIZE;
> >>>+ else
> >>>+ skblen = count;
> >>>+
> >>>+ *frag = bt_skb_send_alloc(sk, skblen,
> >>>+ msg->msg_flags & MSG_DONTWAIT, &err);
> >>> if (!*frag)
> >>> return -EFAULT;
> >>>- if (memcpy_fromiovec(skb_put(*frag, count), msg->msg_iov, count))
> >>>+
> >>>+ if (memcpy_fromiovec(skb_put(*frag, count),
> >>>+ msg->msg_iov, count))
> >>> return -EFAULT;
> >>>
> >>> sent += count;
> >>> len -= count;
> >>>
> >>>+ final = *frag;
> >>>+
> >>> frag = &(*frag)->next;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>>+ if (l2cap_pi(sk)->fcs == L2CAP_FCS_CRC16) {
> >>>+ if (skb_tailroom(final) < L2CAP_FCS_SIZE) {
> >>>+ *frag = bt_skb_send_alloc(sk, L2CAP_FCS_SIZE,
> >>>+ msg->msg_flags & MSG_DONTWAIT,
> >>>+ &err);
> >
> >Why do we need to check for FCS again? We already added it required
> >space to the last fragment.
> >
>
> If there was room in the HCI fragment, count+2 bytes were allocated
> with bt_skb_send_alloc. However, only count bytes were used by
> skb_put.
>
> This final block of code is doing two things:
>
> 1. Allocating a final HCI fragment for the FCS if there was not
> room for the FCS in the last data fragment.
>
> 2. Doing the skb_put for the FCS bytes.
>
> I will add some comments to this code to help clarify what's going on.
Ok, and do the other way around in the if:
if (l2cap_pi(sk)->fcs != L2CAP_FCS_CRC16)
return sent;
if (skb_tailroom(...
--
Gustavo F. Padovan
http://padovan.org
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-13 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-10 19:14 [RFC 0/7] L2CAP fragmentation changes Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 19:14 ` [RFC 1/7] Bluetooth: Calculate L2CAP FCS on fragmented skbuffs Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 21:22 ` Marcel Holtmann
2010-08-10 21:57 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-10 19:14 ` [RFC 2/7] Bluetooth: Use enhanced L2CAP header structure and symbolic values Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 21:39 ` Marcel Holtmann
2010-08-10 22:07 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-11 2:24 ` Mat Martineau
2010-08-11 3:23 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-10 19:15 ` [RFC 3/7] Bluetooth: Add FCS awareness to L2CAP HCI fragmentation Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 21:29 ` Marcel Holtmann
2010-08-11 3:35 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-11 3:56 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-12 23:36 ` Mat Martineau
2010-08-13 15:41 ` Gustavo F. Padovan [this message]
2010-08-12 23:26 ` Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 19:15 ` [RFC 4/7] Bluetooth: Linearize received L2CAP skbuffs Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 21:38 ` Marcel Holtmann
2010-08-11 3:58 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-10 19:15 ` [RFC 5/7] Bluetooth: Handle fragmented skbs in bt_sock_stream_recvmsg() Mat Martineau
2010-08-11 4:25 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-13 0:07 ` Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 19:15 ` [RFC 6/7] Bluetooth: Reassemble enhanced L2CAP PDUs using skb fragments Mat Martineau
2010-08-11 5:24 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
2010-08-13 0:11 ` Mat Martineau
2010-08-10 19:15 ` [RFC 7/7] Bluetooth: Do not limit enhanced L2CAP max PDU size to HCI MTU Mat Martineau
2010-08-11 5:25 ` Gustavo F. Padovan
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=20100813154132.GA3323@vigoh \
--to=gustavo@padovan.org \
--cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=mathewm@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rshaffer@codeaurora.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).