From: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
To: Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@gmail.com>
Cc: Koen Vandeputte <koen.vandeputte@citymesh.com>,
oneukum@suse.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: commit 662dc80a5e86 breaks rmnet over usb
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2026 08:48:08 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <28cd2d03-6491-490d-89e2-19f81e9bad69@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGRyCJE85fLOahUR3PAUnS_jH4+qpBq37qpged=nvObbg1m+Qw@mail.gmail.com>
On 2/25/26 08:19, Daniele Palmas wrote:
> Hello,
Hello Daniele,
>
> Il giorno lun 23 feb 2026 alle ore 15:08 Laurent Vivier
> <lvivier@redhat.com> ha scritto:
>>
>> On 2/23/26 13:04, Koen Vandeputte wrote:
>>> Hi Laurent,
>>
>> Hi Koen,
>>
>>> I'm testing the latest openwrt state and found an issue probably
>>> caused by your usb mtu limit patch :-)
>>>
>>> I'm talking about this one:
>>> 662dc80a5e86 ("usbnet: limit max_mtu based on device's hard_mtu")
>>>
>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/commit/?h=v6.12.74&id=662dc80a5e86b35bbf339e0b87b7cc3f07c09de1
>>>
>>>
>>> When using wwan0 iface normally, this makes sense, but the problem is
>>> when using QMI modems combined with the rmnet driver and aggregated
>>> frames.
>>>
>>> - The modem is configured to frame sizes of 16383 or 32767 using QMI
>>> - wwan0 (using qmi_wwan) is configured to match this frame size by
>>> setting it's MTU to the same value
>>> - Frames of this size are sent over to qmi_wwan driver (containing
>>> multiple data packets)
>>> - Frames are then forwarded to the rmnet driver
>>> - Frames get de-aggregated here and sent to the network stack for processing.
>>>
>>> The reason here is to reduce USB transfers heavily.
>>>
>>>
>>> As you see, it's perfectly possible here to use very large MTU sizes
>>> as the aggregation feature by rmnet relies on this.
>>> Also the modem can be perfectly configured to send very large aggregated frames.
>>>
>>> After your patch, wwan0 is limited to 1500 bytes it seems, effectively
>>> breaking aggregation.
>>>
>>> On my tests, download speeds are reduced from >300Mbps to ~.8Mbps
>>>
>>> I also made a build reverting this patch and all works well again.
>>>
>>>
>>> Is there any other solution to fix this?
>>> I guess it should be reverted otherwise :-)
>>
>> It's weird to be able to set an MTU that is not supported by the hardware.
>>
>> To restore performance I think the rx_usb_size should be decoupled from MTU max in qmi_wwan.
>>
>> Could you try something like:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/usb/qmi_wwan.c b/drivers/net/usb/qmi_wwan.c
>> index 3a4985b582cb..6b4796fac692 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/usb/qmi_wwan.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/usb/qmi_wwan.c
>> @@ -788,6 +788,8 @@ static int qmi_wwan_bind(struct usbnet *dev, struct usb_interface *intf)
>> usbnet_get_ethernet_addr(dev, cdc_ether->iMACAddress);
>> }
>>
>> + dev->rx_urb_size = 32768;
>> +
>
> So far userspace tools (e.g. also the most important one which is
> ModemManager) rely on changing the rx_urb_size by changing the MTU: I
> know this is ugly, but it is a behavior that has been there since a
> lot of time, not sure how many tools based on this assumption could
> break.
>
> There's also the chance that there are modems which require a higher
> rx_urb_size, so having this fixed could not work well.
>
> Unfortunately usbnet serves many drivers, I agree with Koen that a
> revert is the safest option.
And there is no intermediate driver (qmi_wwan or rmnet) that can define a max_mtu higher
than that defined by usbnet?
Thanks,
Laurent
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-25 7:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-23 12:04 commit 662dc80a5e86 breaks rmnet over usb Koen Vandeputte
2026-02-23 14:08 ` Laurent Vivier
2026-02-23 15:13 ` David Laight
2026-02-25 7:19 ` Daniele Palmas
2026-02-25 7:48 ` Laurent Vivier [this message]
2026-02-25 11:04 ` Laurent Vivier
2026-02-25 14:14 ` Daniele Palmas
2026-02-26 1:01 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-02-26 8:26 ` Daniele Palmas
2026-02-26 9:09 ` Laurent Vivier
2026-02-26 18:18 ` Daniele Palmas
2026-02-27 16:15 ` Daniele Palmas
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=28cd2d03-6491-490d-89e2-19f81e9bad69@redhat.com \
--to=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=dnlplm@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=koen.vandeputte@citymesh.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oneukum@suse.com \
--cc=pabeni@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