netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] Always build GSO/GRO functionality into the kernel
Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:10:19 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50A3983B.4010303@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1352859928.4497.1.camel@edumazet-glaptop>

On 11/13/2012 09:25 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 20:24 -0500, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>> This patch series is a revision suggested by Eric to solve the problem where
>> a host without IPv6 support drops GSO frames from the guest.
>>
>> The problem is that GSO/GRO support is per protocol, and when said protocol
>> is not loaded or is disabled, packets attempting to go through GSO/GRO code paths
>> are dropped.  This causes retransmissions and a two orders of magnitude drop in
>> performance.
>>
>> Prior attempt to solve the problem simply enabled enough GSO/GRO functionality
>> for IPv6 protocol when IPv6 was diabled.  This did not solve the problem when
>> the protocol was not build in or was blacklisted.
>> To solve the problem, it was suggested that we separate GSO/GRO callback
>> registration from packet processing registrations.  That way
>> GSO/GRO callbacks can be built into the kernel and always be there.
>> This patch series attempts to do just that.
>> * Patches 1 and 2 split the GSO/GRO handlers from packet_type and convert
>>    to the new structure.
>> * Patches 3, 4 and 5 do the same thing for net_protocol structure.
>> * The rest of the patches try to incrementally move the IPv6 GSO/GRO
>>    code out of the module and into the static kernel build.  Some IPv6
>>    helper functions also had to move as well.
>>
>> I am currently testing the patches, but if folks could look this over
>> and send me any comments, I'd appreciate it.
>
> Seems very nice !
>
> I am just wondering if GSO/GRO is fully enabled at every step ?
>

I think so.  I ran basic tests along most of the steps and it seemed to 
be enabled.  That's why this is a 13 patch series :)  Tried to do it 
incrementally without impacting functionality.

-vlad

      reply	other threads:[~2012-11-14 13:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-14  1:24 [RFC PATCH 00/13] Always build GSO/GRO functionality into the kernel Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 01/13] net: Add generic packet offload infrastructure Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  2:24   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-11-14 13:03     ` Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 02/13] core: Switch to using the new packet offload infrustructure Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 03/13] net: Add net protocol offload registration infrustructure Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  8:22   ` Nicolas Dichtel
2012-11-14 13:08     ` Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14 23:14   ` Francois Romieu
2012-11-15  2:16     ` Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 04/13] ipv6: Add new offload registration infrastructure Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 05/13] ipv4: Switch to using the new offload infrastructure Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 06/13] ipv6: Switch to using " Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 07/13] ipv6: Separate ipv6 offload support Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 08/13] ipv6: Separate tcp offload functionality Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 09/13] ipv6: Separate out UDP " Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 10/13] ipv6: Move exthdr offload support into separate file Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 11/13] ipv6: Update ipv6 static library with newly needed functions Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 12/13] ipv4: Pull GSO registration out of inet_init() Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-14  1:24 ` [RFC PATCH 13/13] ipv6: Pull IPv6 GSO registration out of the module Vlad Yasevich
2012-11-16 22:04   ` Ben Hutchings
2012-11-14  2:25 ` [RFC PATCH 00/13] Always build GSO/GRO functionality into the kernel Eric Dumazet
2012-11-14 13:10   ` Vlad Yasevich [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=50A3983B.4010303@redhat.com \
    --to=vyasevic@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --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).