From: "Chuck Lever" <cel@kernel.org>
To: "Sabrina Dubroca" <sd@queasysnail.net>
Cc: "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
"Simon Horman" <horms@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev,
"Chuck Lever" <chuck.lever@oracle.com>,
"Hannes Reinecke" <hare@suse.de>,
"Alistair Francis" <alistair.francis@wdc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v9 0/5] TLS read_sock performance scalability
Date: Mon, 04 May 2026 17:59:12 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4f3e1e36-1678-4e5a-b7d4-81eba2e1df11@app.fastmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <afigKenambAyKkhu@krikkit>
On Mon, May 4, 2026, at 3:33 PM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> 2026-05-03, 21:34:01 +0200, Chuck Lever wrote:
>> On 5/3/26 3:04 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> > On Wed, 29 Apr 2026 17:48:07 -0400 Chuck Lever wrote:
>> >> I'd like to encourage in-kernel kTLS consumers (i.e., NFS and
>> >> NVMe/TCP) to coalesce on the use of read_sock. When I suggested
>> >> this to Hannes, he reported a few performance scalability issues
>> >> with read_sock.
>> >
>> > Meaning, this series achieves.. what right now?
>> > I mean - the headline is "performance scalability" and there's no
>> > performance testing result in any of the messages :S
>> > Patch 5 for instance "seems logical" but how much difference does
>> > it make?
>>
>> The cover Subject: line has not been changed so all the revisions of
>> this series can be located easily.
>
> (not to bikeshed, links to lore also do that)
>
>> The cover letter makes it clear that the series is now only a clean-up
>> series. Since async_capable is set to false for TLSv1.3, there is no
>> performance benefit to these changes, so I don't intend to post a
>> motivation for it based on performance.
>
> Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought there was a somewhat noticeable
> benefit to the "suppress spurious wakeups" patch (not +20%, but at
> least improved behavior for some users of kTLS), and maybe the "flush
> backlog" one.
>
> Patch 2 may still be beneficial (though it's now mixing 2 separate
> changes), and patch 1 is a very reasonable code cleanup.
>
> Patch 4 does feel like a pretty large amount of churn if it has no
> observable benefit.
There is potential benefit to eliminating spurious wake-ups,
but nothing I've found to be observable at the application
level.
>> We'd really like
>> to get TLS KeyUpdate working for in-kernel TLS consumers, so anything
>> that can move this process forward is welcome.
>
> But net/tls doesn't need any changes for that, right?
>> 1. The in-kernel TLS consumers need to reliably and securely handle TLS
>> Alerts. That is coming in the next series I plan to post.
This series will make changes to net/tls/.
--
Chuck Lever
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-04 15:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-29 21:48 [PATCH net-next v9 0/5] TLS read_sock performance scalability Chuck Lever
2026-04-29 21:48 ` [PATCH net-next v9 1/5] tls: Abort the connection on decrypt failure Chuck Lever
2026-05-03 1:20 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-29 21:48 ` [PATCH net-next v9 2/5] tls: Fix dangling skb pointer in tls_sw_read_sock() Chuck Lever
2026-05-03 1:05 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-29 21:48 ` [PATCH net-next v9 3/5] tls: Factor tls_strp_msg_release() from tls_strp_msg_done() Chuck Lever
2026-05-03 1:09 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-29 21:48 ` [PATCH net-next v9 4/5] tls: Suppress spurious saved_data_ready on all receive paths Chuck Lever
2026-05-03 1:19 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-29 21:48 ` [PATCH net-next v9 5/5] tls: Flush backlog before waiting for a new record Chuck Lever
2026-04-29 23:13 ` [PATCH net-next v9 0/5] TLS read_sock performance scalability Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-29 23:15 ` Chuck Lever
2026-05-03 1:04 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-03 19:34 ` Chuck Lever
2026-05-04 13:33 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2026-05-04 15:59 ` Chuck Lever [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=4f3e1e36-1678-4e5a-b7d4-81eba2e1df11@app.fastmail.com \
--to=cel@kernel.org \
--cc=alistair.francis@wdc.com \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sd@queasysnail.net \
/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