From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To: David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: optimize skb_postpull_rcsum()
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2021 23:40:09 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211202214009.5hm3diwom4qsbsjd@skbuf> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9eefc224988841c9b1a0b6c6eb3348b8@AcuMS.aculab.com>
On Thu, Dec 02, 2021 at 08:58:46PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> > To me it looks like the strange part is that the checksum of the removed
> > block (printed by me as "csum_partial(start, len, 0)" inside
> > skb_postpull_rcsum()) is the same as the skb->csum itself.
>
> If you are removing all the bytes that made the original checksum
> that will happen.
> And that might be true for the packets you are building.
Yes, I am not removing all the bytes that made up the original L2
payload csum. Let me pull up the skb_dump from my original message:
here is where the enetc saw the the "start" variable (old skb->data)
beginning of the frame points here
v v
skb headroom: 00000040: 88 80 00 0a 00 33 9d 40 f0 41 01 80 00 00 08 0f
OCELOT_TAG_LEN bytes into the frame,
the real MAC header can be found
v
skb headroom: 00000050: 00 10 00 00 00 04 9f 05 f6 28 ba ae e4 b6 2c 3d
skb headroom: 00000060: 08 00
skb linear: 00000000: 45 00 00 54 27 ac 00 00 40 01 09 a8 c0 a8 64 03
^
the skb_postpull_rcsum is called from "start"
pointer until the first byte prior to this one
skb linear: 00000010: c0 a8 64 01 00 00 10 e6 01 5c 00 04 49 30 a7 61
skb linear: 00000020: 00 00 00 00 3d 55 01 00 00 00 00 00 10 11 12 13
skb linear: 00000030: 14 15 16 17 18 19 1a 1b 1c 1d 1e 1f 20 21 22 23
skb linear: 00000040: 24 25 26 27 28 29 2a 2b 2c 2d 2e 2f 30 31 32 33
skb linear: 00000050: 34 35 36 37
So skb_postpull_rcsum() is called from "skb headroom" offset 0x4e to
offset 0x61 inclusive (0x61 - 0x4e + 1 = 20 == OCELOT_TAG_LEN).
However as I understand it, the CHECKSUM_COMPLETE of this packet is
calculated by enetc from "skb headroom" offset 0x4e and all the way
until "skb linear" offset 0x53. So there is still a good chunk of packet
to go. That's why it is still a mystery to me why the checksums would be
equal. They still are, with your change suggested below, of course, but
at least there is no splat now.
>
> Try replacing both ~ with -.
> So replace:
> skb->csum = ~csum_partial(start, len, ~skb->csum);
> with:
> skb->csum = -csum_partial(start, len, -skb->csum);
>
> That should geneate ~0u instead 0 (if I've got my maths right).
Indeed, replacing both one's complement operations with two's complement
seems to produce correct results (consistent with old code) in all cases
that I am testing with (ICMP, TCP, UDP). Thanks!
>
> David
>
> -
> Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
> Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-02 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-24 20:24 [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: small csum optimizations Eric Dumazet
2021-11-24 20:24 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] gro: optimize skb_gro_postpull_rcsum() Eric Dumazet
2021-11-24 20:24 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: optimize skb_postpull_rcsum() Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25 9:41 ` David Laight
2021-11-25 13:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-25 14:29 ` David Laight
2021-12-02 13:10 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-12-02 14:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-12-02 16:29 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-12-02 19:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-12-02 20:37 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-12-02 21:07 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-12-02 20:40 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-12-02 20:58 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-12-02 20:58 ` David Laight
2021-12-02 21:40 ` Vladimir Oltean [this message]
2021-12-03 14:51 ` David Laight
2021-12-03 14:57 ` David Laight
2021-12-03 16:14 ` Vladimir Oltean
2021-12-03 16:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-12-03 16:47 ` David Laight
2021-12-03 16:58 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-12-03 17:41 ` David Laight
2021-12-02 15:06 ` David Laight
2021-12-02 15:22 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-11-26 5:20 ` [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: small csum optimizations patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20211202214009.5hm3diwom4qsbsjd@skbuf \
--to=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).