From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: vyasevic@redhat.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] ipv6: Enable enough of the code to handle GSO when disabled.
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 21:33:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1350502439.26103.892.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <507F02F1.5010501@redhat.com>
On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 15:11 -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> On 10/17/2012 12:13 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 11:46 -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> >
> >> This patch attempts to solve this by enabling just enough code so GSO
> >> is correctly processed. However, I should point out that if IPv6 is
> >> simply blacklisted or not built for the kernel, this problem will
> >> still persist.
> >
> > So I guess this should be done in a different way ?
> >
> > We currently use a single structure (struct packet_type) to hold
> > pointers to different methods. (The .func() field, and the gso/gro
> > stuff)
> >
> > We probably need to split it in two parts, and make one part linked into
> > kernel, even if CONFIG_IPV6=n, so that GRO/GSO is fully IPv4/IPv6
> > functional.
>
> The thing about this approach is that if there are any other protocols
> that could have to provide their own segmentation functionality, such
> functionality would always have to be part of the kernel. I wasn't sure
> how much I liked that.
Well, an hypervisor probably has to handle IPv6, at least to a certain
extent.
Make this part a module of its own, or statically linked into vmlinux,
instead of adding some stubs in IPv6 'module'
>
> >
> > By the way, do we really need a hash table for this ?
> > It seems we only have IPv4 (ETH_P_IP) and IPv6 (ETH_P_IPV6) to take care
> > of ?
>
> Which hash are you talking about? I didn't add any hashes.
I suspect you didnt really understood what I said then.
packet_type structures are hashed into ptype_base[]
struct list_head *head = &ptype_base[ntohs(type) & PTYPE_HASH_MASK];
Now let say we split the structure into 2 parts.
ptype_base[] would be used for pre GRO/GSO stuff (packet handlers)
So we would need to add a second hash for the GRO/GSO stuff.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-17 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-17 15:46 [PATCHv3] ipv6: Enable enough of the code to handle GSO when disabled Vlad Yasevich
2012-10-17 16:13 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-10-17 16:50 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-10-17 19:03 ` Vlad Yasevich
2012-10-17 19:11 ` Vlad Yasevich
2012-10-17 19:33 ` Eric Dumazet [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=1350502439.26103.892.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vyasevic@redhat.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