netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Benc <jbenc@redhat.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] vxlan: implement GPE in L2 mode
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 19:16:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160301191622.53df6f3f@griffin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S37aU8q1QResU+HKMeCbMgkGDqWbnuckqs1V_9bC-jp8Ow@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 29 Feb 2016 09:13:50 -0800, Tom Herbert wrote:
> As defined now, GPB can't be used with VXLAN-GPE at all, but when I
> read your patch it looks very much like GPB is being checked and
> allowed in the VXLAN-GPE path. The fact that "if (vs->flags &
> VXLAN_F_GBP)" always fails for VXLAN-GPE packets because of
> configuration constraints is not at all obvious, and really this just
> results in an unnecessary conditional that gives the same answer for
> every single VXLAN-GPE packet which we've already checked for just a
> few lines above. At least the check for GPB could be moved to an else
> block of " if (vs->flags & VXLAN_F_GPE)", this alone improves clarity
> and eliminates an unnecessary conditional in the VXLAN-GPE path.

The problem here is ordering. GPE needs to be called before
iptunnel_pull_header, while GBP needs to be called after udp_tun_rx_dst
(and hence after iptunnel_pull_header).

I agree that it's a check that's done for every packet and would be
nice to get rid of. On the other hand, the amount of processing in the
rx path of vxlan is so huge that it hardly matters. Yes, we should work
on overall vxlan performance and it's something I'm actually looking
into.

As for not being obvious that the GBP processing can't happen, I see
your point. I'll add a comment that explains this to the code in v2.

Thanks,

 Jiri

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-01 18:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-02-26  7:48 [PATCH net-next 0/5] vxlan: implement Generic Protocol Extension (GPE) Jiri Benc
2016-02-26  7:48 ` [PATCH net-next 1/5] vxlan: implement GPE in L2 mode Jiri Benc
2016-02-26 23:51   ` Tom Herbert
2016-02-27 19:31     ` Jiri Benc
2016-02-27 20:54       ` Tom Herbert
2016-02-27 21:02         ` Tom Herbert
2016-02-29 10:23         ` Jiri Benc
2016-02-29 17:13           ` Tom Herbert
2016-03-01 18:16             ` Jiri Benc [this message]
2016-02-26  7:48 ` [PATCH net-next 2/5] vxlan: move L2 mode initialization to a separate function Jiri Benc
2016-02-26  7:48 ` [PATCH net-next 3/5] vxlan: move fdb code to common location in vxlan_xmit Jiri Benc
2016-02-26  7:48 ` [PATCH net-next 4/5] vxlan: fix too large pskb_may_pull with remote checksum Jiri Benc
2016-02-26  7:48 ` [PATCH net-next 5/5] vxlan: implement GPE in L3 mode Jiri Benc
2016-02-26 22:22   ` Jesse Gross
2016-02-26 23:42     ` Tom Herbert
2016-02-27 19:26       ` Jiri Benc
2016-02-27 19:21     ` Jiri Benc
2016-02-27 19:44       ` Jiri Benc
2016-03-08 22:18         ` Jesse Gross

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=20160301191622.53df6f3f@griffin \
    --to=jbenc@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tom@herbertland.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).