From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: "Zhaoping Shu (舒召平)" <Zhaoping.Shu@mediatek.com>,
"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"willemb@google.com" <willemb@google.com>,
"willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com"
<willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: "kuniyu@google.com" <kuniyu@google.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>,
"imv4bel@gmail.com" <imv4bel@gmail.com>,
"alice@isovalent.com" <alice@isovalent.com>,
"eilaimemedsnaimel@gmail.com" <eilaimemedsnaimel@gmail.com>,
"HW He (何伟)" <HW.He@mediatek.com>,
"steffen.klassert@secunet.com" <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
"Haijun Liu (刘海军)" <haijun.liu@mediatek.com>,
"horms@kernel.org" <horms@kernel.org>,
"Xiayu Zhang (张夏宇)" <Xiayu.Zhang@mediatek.com>,
"Iven Yang (阳光)" <Iven.Yang@mediatek.com>,
"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"Lambert Wang (王伟)" <Lambert.Wang@mediatek.com>,
"matthias.bgg@gmail.com" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"sd@queasysnail.net" <sd@queasysnail.net>,
"AngeloGioacchino Del Regno"
<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
"ncardwell@google.com" <ncardwell@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: gro: avoid nesting TCP GSO skbs in skb_gro_receive_list()
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2026 11:24:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <willemdebruijn.kernel.104ee0d69507c@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c84c9f4bd495977e08ee38343282f05f42b080fb.camel@mediatek.com>
Zhaoping Shu (舒召平) wrote:
> On Wed, 2026-07-29 at 14:57 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > External email : Please do not click links or open attachments until
> > you have verified the sender or the content.
> >
> >
> > Zhaoping Shu (舒召平) wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2026-07-23 at 16:02 +0200, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 3:39 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, 23 Jul 2026 17:16:01 +0800 zhaoping.shu@mediatek.com
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > From: HW He <hw.he@mediatek.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On devices that support both NETIF_F_GRO_HW and
> > > > > > NETIF_F_GRO_FRAGLIST,
> > > > >
> > > > > "devices that support FRAGLIST"? Isn't it a software feature?
> > >
> > > Sorry for not making it clear. The test environment is:
> > > device supports GRO_HW, and enable NETIF_F_GRO_FRAGLIST in
> > > driver.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > the hardware or driver may deliver packets that have already
> > > > > > been
> > > > >
> > > > > If you have a driver in mind please name it.
> > > > >
> > > > > > aggregated into a TCP GSO skb with frags[]. GRO may then
> > > > > > aggregate the skb again in skb_gro_receive_list().
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This can create a nested GSO skb, which is not handled
> > > > > > correctly
> > > > > > by the
> > > > > > later GSO segmentation paths. When the skb is segmented by
> > > > > > skb_segment_list(), it not be fully restored to the original
> > > > > > packets.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Avoid this by setting NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->flush for GSO skbs
> > > > > > before
> > > > > > aggregation.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think we can do this. For GRO_HW devices re-aggregating
> > > > > in SW is quite helpful, HW often runs out of contexts or times
> > > > > out too soon, generating skbs with 16kB..32kB of data, the SW
> > > > > can help bring it up to full TSO.
> > >
> > > I'll try to explain this issue below.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Also, after e751256486d0 ("net: gro: fix double aggregation of
> > > > flush-marked skbs"), it's not clear an another bug remains.
> > > >
> > > > If it is: as said "nested GRO" of hw + sw GRO is intentional,
> > > > e.g.,
> > > > for BIG-TCP.
> > > >
> > > > But it may not be anticipated for skb_gro_receive_list. One
> > > > option
> > > > would be to skip the fraglist GSO optimization for such packets.
> > > >
> > > > First I'd like to understand better what exact bug remains.
> > >
> > > I agree that re-aggregation is useful for improving GRO efficiency.
> > >
> > > However, as a general rule, a GSO skb must be segment back to the
> > > exact original packets stream. In tethering test,
> > > skb_segment_list()
> > > cannot correctly segment a nested GSO skb produced by this path.
> >
> > So the specific issue is a driver that builds a regular (HW) GSO
> > packet followed by software GSO that uses fraglist?
> >
> > Then I see three paths to fixing this
> >
> > 1. decline to further apply SW GRO if skb is GSO and in fraglist mode
> > 2. if in fraglist mode, further apply SW GRO, but do not use fraglist
> > 3. in skb_segment_list detect this case and fall back onto
> > skb_segment
> >
> > We already apply option 3 to various cases where skb_segment_list
> > cannot handle complex use-cases of fraglist.
> >
> > This patch chooses option 1, which is fine. Alternatively it could
> > fall through to the regular skb_gro_receive path below.
> >
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Patch (option 1) is a minimal fix for the reported issue.
And that would be sufficient.
> For the other options, my initial thought is to handle this in
> tcp4_check_fraglist_gro()/tcp6_check_fraglist_gro(): if the netdev
> has both NETIF_F_GRO_HW and NETIF_F_GRO_FRAGLIST enabled, do not set
> NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_flist, so that this tethering/forwarding case
> can keep using SW GRO and fall through to the regular skb_gro_receive()
> path instead of skb_gro_receive_list().
Yes, that sounds good. And then the above option 1 is not needed.
No HW-GRO implementation generates fraglist GRO packets, so the two
are fundamentally at odds anyway.
Ignoring the fraglist hint for HW-GRO skbs sounds good to me, thanks.
> If that direction makes sense, I can work on it,
> or send a follow-up patch to fix the reported issue with option 1.
>
> > > This issue can reproduce in the following scenario:
> > > 1.Driver submits a single TCP packet, P1. P1 is kept in the
> > > gro_list as the first packet.
> > >
> > > 2. The driver submits a TCP GSO skb, P2. P2 has already aggregated
> > > multiple TCP packets by HW_GRO, and its non-linear data is stored
> > > in
> > > frags[].
> > >
> > > 3. P1 and P2 match the GRO rules, and since there is no local
> > > socket,
> > > they are aggregated by skb_gro_receive_list(). The resulting skb,
> > > P3, has a frag_list entry that still contains frags[]:
> > > P3: [ Linear Data ] -> frag_list -> [ Linear Data ]
> > > [ frag[1] ]
> > > [ frag[2] ]
> > > ...
> > >
> > > 4. Later, tcp4_gso_segment() or tcp6_gso_segment() calls
> > > skb_segment_list() to segment P3. However, skb_segment_list() only
> > > segments the entries in frag_list. It does not segment the frags[]
> > > inside P2, so P3 is not restored to the original packets, which
> > > leads
> > > to IP fragmentation or packet drop in the following path.
> > >
> > > The patch only prevents that nested case before
> > > skb_gro_receive_list()
> > > aggregation. It does not affect packets that are re-aggregated by
> > > skb_gro_receive().
> >
> > Thanks for the detailed explanation.
> >
> >
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-23 9:16 [PATCH net v2] net: gro: avoid nesting TCP GSO skbs in skb_gro_receive_list() zhaoping.shu
2026-07-23 13:39 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-07-23 14:02 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-07-29 7:39 ` Zhaoping Shu (舒召平)
2026-07-29 18:57 ` Willem de Bruijn
2026-08-03 9:32 ` Zhaoping Shu (舒召平)
2026-08-03 15:24 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
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.104ee0d69507c@gmail.com \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=HW.He@mediatek.com \
--cc=Iven.Yang@mediatek.com \
--cc=Lambert.Wang@mediatek.com \
--cc=Xiayu.Zhang@mediatek.com \
--cc=Zhaoping.Shu@mediatek.com \
--cc=alice@isovalent.com \
--cc=angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eilaimemedsnaimel@gmail.com \
--cc=haijun.liu@mediatek.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=imv4bel@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=matthias.bgg@gmail.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sd@queasysnail.net \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
--cc=willemb@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox