From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8889D3DF019 for ; Mon, 4 May 2026 15:59:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777910375; cv=none; b=AeVlqoJ2rhh5zWudeKJkW+oIF/UrK0MqM77WYN4Hg3cyauQ0BPAZXnyntghvnYAwFxeOH5OTXxmlcIrowxMiBIUC6PhADc+pugVhr0fyLE+cg/oLWvqS5gcQrp8kkrJKAKb6/+JnumqFnoZMjLcHFIHM2ot6skF6c/yqM/SayOY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777910375; c=relaxed/simple; bh=xTd/dv1zHBWY+66Qs0Ea3v57289kHiF5l1lPTZVm1mI=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Subject:Content-Type; b=UvmxWbmfPZN3KwUH5Aiv8D5V5W7PFpUbeBszhtG/muNP7Uxb6nxU8ju17uJgSVTiMdNrXKPY1HHnj3A+X/4K9lnUPPVMAFWSMquYv4+H5qcL8qgM51ahMvW99suiIYWx3BNwHpYc0vNNctBnrCovg+AOg5uIrEh3esrutPsy0bA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=OBWaWdaj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="OBWaWdaj" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DB79CC2BCF5; Mon, 4 May 2026 15:59:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1777910375; bh=xTd/dv1zHBWY+66Qs0Ea3v57289kHiF5l1lPTZVm1mI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=OBWaWdajTeiOwbQCy/9FBz3ml5nHfzL+zbmaLo5fw6f76ZBmacsixqNc2yhpM7TQd 1LNggXGChiTi0jqGGaxXPi5LvmEw/mghSb97IWwG6RqQfm5KJxtXP8JsmyW50A/rn8 zRXEdcNGddSnuq77VkM9xmx/lbWm0LwSO2irNNZwR9jP4xSTyrJ7H+FLdy+pTc6/VM TnMJNPSpT58Gt57qXa5SYmKwi7jfShX4Sn89ZFwm9sp1moJwxxGPOWJKgG/f1/h0Xk OFdVTBIrvfOKSTcFt5SM600S/rlhvCLaD5XYClgbJrfxm/aL2yhb1hm6ys1gqKQLJO FOzfIUD3nYbtQ== Received: from phl-compute-10.internal (phl-compute-10.internal [10.202.2.50]) by mailfauth.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4F32F40085; Mon, 4 May 2026 11:59:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-imap-15 ([10.202.2.104]) by phl-compute-10.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 04 May 2026 11:59:33 -0400 X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefhedrtddtgdelledviecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefoggffhffvvefkjghfufgtgfesthejredtredttdenucfhrhhomhepfdevhhhutghk ucfnvghvvghrfdcuoegtvghlsehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnh ephfffkefffedtgfehieevkeduuefhvdejvdefvdeuuddvgeelkeegtefgudfhfeelnecu vehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheptghhuhgtkh hlvghvvghrodhmvghsmhhtphgruhhthhhpvghrshhonhgrlhhithihqdduieefgeelleel heelqdefvdelkeeggedvfedqtggvlheppehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghesfhgrshhtmhgrih hlrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeduuddpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghp thhtohepjhhohhhnrdhfrghsthgrsggvnhgusehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtoh epvgguuhhmrgiivghtsehgohhoghhlvgdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehhohhrmhhssehk vghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehkuhgsrgeskhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtg hpthhtohepkhgvrhhnvghlqdhtlhhsqdhhrghnughshhgrkhgvsehlihhsthhsrdhlihhn uhigrdguvghvpdhrtghpthhtoheptghhuhgtkhdrlhgvvhgvrhesohhrrggtlhgvrdgtoh hmpdhrtghpthhtohepshgusehquhgvrghshihsnhgrihhlrdhnvghtpdhrtghpthhtohep phgrsggvnhhisehrvgguhhgrthdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehhrghrvgesshhushgvrd guvg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: ifa6e4810:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.phl.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id ADE90780070; Mon, 4 May 2026 11:59:33 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-ThreadId: A6DWjhiQzWgR Date: Mon, 04 May 2026 17:59:12 +0200 From: "Chuck Lever" To: "Sabrina Dubroca" Cc: "Jakub Kicinski" , "John Fastabend" , "Eric Dumazet" , "Simon Horman" , "Paolo Abeni" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev, "Chuck Lever" , "Hannes Reinecke" , "Alistair Francis" Message-Id: <4f3e1e36-1678-4e5a-b7d4-81eba2e1df11@app.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20260429-tls-read-sock-v9-0-39e71aa7810f@oracle.com> <20260502180415.0b0bf12b@kernel.org> <2d2b5da3-3bfc-4882-8886-8f20b61254e3@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v9 0/5] TLS read_sock performance scalability Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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