From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: Solio Sarabia <solio.sarabia@intel.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
sthemmin@microsoft.com, shiny.sebastian@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] veth: propagate bridge GSO to peer
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 10:10:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1512065450.19682.25.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171130100825.01ea1d14@xeon-e3>
On Thu, 2017-11-30 at 10:08 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:59:23 -0800
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2017-11-30 at 09:49 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > On Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:26:39 -0800
> > > Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 2017-11-30 at 09:10 -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The problem goes back into the core GSO networking code.
> > > > > Something like this is needed.
> > > > >
> > > > > static inline bool netif_needs_gso(struct sk_buff *skb,
> > > > > const struct net_device
> > > > > *dev,
> > > > > netdev_features_t features)
> > > > > {
> > > > > return skb_is_gso(skb) &&
> > > > > (!skb_gso_ok(skb, features) ||
> > > > > unlikely(skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs > dev-
> > > > > > gso_max_segs) || << new
> > > > >
> > > > > unlikely(skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size > dev-
> > > > > > gso_max_size) || << new
> > > > >
> > > > > unlikely((skb->ip_summed != CHECKSUM_PARTIAL)
> > > > > &&
> > > > > (skb->ip_summed !=
> > > > > CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY)));
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > What that will do is split up the monster GSO packets if they
> > > > > ever
> > > > > bleed
> > > > > across from one device to another through the twisty mazes of
> > > > > packet
> > > > > processing paths.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Since very few drivers have these gso_max_segs / gso_max_size,
> > > > check
> > > > could be done in their ndo_features_check()
> > >
> > > Actually, we already check for max_segs, just missing check for
> > > size
> > > here:
> > >
> > > From 71a134f41c4aae8947241091300d21745aa237f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > > 2001
> > > From: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
> > > Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:45:11 -0800
> > > Subject: [PATCH] net: do not GSO if frame is too large
> > >
> > > This adds an additional check to breakup skb's that exceed a
> > > devices
> > > GSO maximum size. The code was already checking for too many
> > > segments
> > > but did not check size.
> > >
> > > This has been observed to be a problem when using containers on
> > > Hyper-V/Azure where the allowed GSO maximum size is less than
> > > maximum and skb's have gone through multiple layers to arrive
> > > at the virtual device.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <sthemmin@microsoft.com>
> > > ---
> > > net/core/dev.c | 4 +++-
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> > > index 07ed21d64f92..0bb398f3bfa3 100644
> > > --- a/net/core/dev.c
> > > +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> > > @@ -2918,9 +2918,11 @@ static netdev_features_t
> > > gso_features_check(const struct sk_buff *skb,
> > > struct net_device
> > > *dev,
> > > netdev_features_t
> > > features)
> > > {
> > > + unsigned int gso_size = skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_size;
> > > u16 gso_segs = skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs;
> > >
> > > - if (gso_segs > dev->gso_max_segs)
> > > + if (gso_segs > dev->gso_max_segs ||
> > > + gso_size > dev->gso_max_size)
> > > return features & ~NETIF_F_GSO_MASK;
> > >
> > > /* Support for GSO partial features requires software
> >
> >
> > Yes, but check commit 743b03a83297690f0bd38c452a3bbb47d2be300a
> > ("net: remove netdevice gso_min_segs")
> >
> > Plan was to get rid of the existing check, not adding new ones :/
>
> Sure can do it in the driver and that has other benefits like ability
> to backport to older distributions.
>
> Still need gso_max_size though since want to tell TCP to avoid
> generating mega-jumbo frames.
>
Sure, the netdev->gso_max_{size|segs} are staying.
I was simply trying to not add another check in fast path :/
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-30 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-26 18:17 [PATCH RFC 0/2] veth, bridge, and GSO maximums Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-26 18:17 ` [PATCH RFC 1/2] br: add notifier for when bridge changes it " Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-26 18:17 ` [PATCH RFC 2/2] veth: propagate bridge GSO to peer Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-27 3:13 ` David Ahern
2017-11-27 7:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-27 20:14 ` Solio Sarabia
2017-11-27 21:15 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-28 1:42 ` Solio Sarabia
2017-11-28 2:02 ` David Ahern
2017-11-30 0:35 ` Solio Sarabia
2017-11-30 17:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-30 17:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-11-30 17:36 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-30 17:38 ` David Miller
2017-11-30 17:49 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-30 17:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-11-30 18:08 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-30 18:10 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2017-12-01 20:30 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-30 15:47 ` [PATCH RFC 0/2] veth, bridge, and GSO maximums David Miller
2017-11-30 17:11 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-11-30 20:50 ` Alexander Duyck
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=1512065450.19682.25.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shiny.sebastian@intel.com \
--cc=solio.sarabia@intel.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=sthemmin@microsoft.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).