Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, yang.yang29@zte.com.cn
Cc: willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net,
	kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, shuah@kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhang.yunkai@zte.com.cn,
	xu.xin16@zte.com.cn, jiang.xuexin@zte.com.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH linux-next v2] selftests: net: udpgso_bench_tx: Add test for IP fragmentation of UDP packets
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 08:35:04 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6401f7889e959_3f6dc82084b@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iK3frwxddhSbbi5cvmuSjr2TqPbD_mTgBa3k4ESDQnrHA@mail.gmail.com>

Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 12:03 PM <yang.yang29@zte.com.cn> wrote:
> >
> > > Did you actually observe a difference in behavior with this change?
> >
> > The test of UDP only cares about sending, and does not much need to
> > consider the problem of PMTU, we configure it to IP_PMTUDISC_DONT.
> >     IP_PMTUDISC_DONT: turn off pmtu detection.
> >     IP_PMTUDISC_OMIT: the same as DONT, but in some scenarios, DF will
> > be ignored. I did not construct such a scene, presumably when forwarding.
> > Any way, in this test, is the same as DONT.

My points was not to compare IP_PMTUDISC_OMIT to .._DONT but to .._DO,
which is what the existing UDP GSO test is setting.

USO should generate segments that meet MTU rules. The test forces
the DF bit (IP_PMTUDISC_DO).

UFO instead requires local fragmentation, must enter the path for this
in ip_output.c. It should fail if IP_PMTUDISC_DO is set:

        /* Unless user demanded real pmtu discovery (IP_PMTUDISC_DO), we allow
         * to fragment the frame generated here. No matter, what transforms
         * how transforms change size of the packet, it will come out.
         */
        skb->ignore_df = ip_sk_ignore_df(sk);

        /* DF bit is set when we want to see DF on outgoing frames.
         * If ignore_df is set too, we still allow to fragment this frame
         * locally. */
        if (inet->pmtudisc == IP_PMTUDISC_DO ||
            inet->pmtudisc == IP_PMTUDISC_PROBE ||
            (skb->len <= dst_mtu(&rt->dst) &&
             ip_dont_fragment(sk, &rt->dst)))
                df = htons(IP_DF);
 
> >
> > We have a question, what is the point of this test if it is not compared to
> > UDP GSO and IP fragmentation. No user or tool will segment in user mode,

Are you saying no process will use UDP_SEGMENT?

The local protocol stack removed UFO in series d9d30adf5677.
USO can be offloaded to hardware by quite a few devices (NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_L4).
> > UDP GSO should compare performance with IP fragmentation.
> 
> I think it is misleading to think the cost of IP fragmentation matters
> at the sender side.
> 
> Major issue is the receiving side, with many implications of memory
> and cpu costs,
> not counting amplifications of potential packet losses.
> 
> So your patch would make sense if you also change
> tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_rx.c accordingly.
> 
> If you send UDP packets to a receiver, then you should not receive
> ICMP errors, unless a reassembly error occured.
> 
> About ICMP packets being disruptive, you can always ignore errors at
> sendmsg() time and retry the syscall.



  reply	other threads:[~2023-03-03 13:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-02 10:38 [PATCH linux-next v2] selftests: net: udpgso_bench_tx: Add test for IP fragmentation of UDP packets yang.yang29
2023-03-02 15:14 ` Willem de Bruijn
2023-03-03 11:00   ` yang.yang29
2023-03-03 11:27     ` Eric Dumazet
2023-03-03 13:35       ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2023-03-06  7:31         ` xu xin
2023-03-06 14:35           ` Willem de Bruijn

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=6401f7889e959_3f6dc82084b@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch \
    --to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=jiang.xuexin@zte.com.cn \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=xu.xin16@zte.com.cn \
    --cc=yang.yang29@zte.com.cn \
    --cc=zhang.yunkai@zte.com.cn \
    /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