From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Cc: Richard Gobert <richardbgobert@gmail.com>,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, dsahern@kernel.org,
aleksander.lobakin@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v1 1/2] net: gro: add flush check in udp_gro_receive_segment
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 11:00:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <661d41106f996_c0c829445@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKgT0UfB+3DTjK7vq1uvG-2xtA53pw03ygJhwSG8j1bPtmYU8A@mail.gmail.com>
Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 11:38 AM Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Richard Gobert wrote:
> > > GRO-GSO path is supposed to be transparent and as such L3 flush checks are
> > > relevant to all flows which call skb_gro_receive. This patch uses the same
> > > logic and code from tcp_gro_receive but in the relevant flow path in
> > > udp_gro_receive_segment.
> > >
> > > Fixes: 36707061d6ba ("udp: allow forwarding of plain (non-fraglisted) UDP GRO packets")
> > > Signed-off-by: Richard Gobert <richardbgobert@gmail.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
> >
> > > ---
> > > net/ipv4/udp_offload.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > > index 3498dd1d0694..1f4e08f43c4b 100644
> > > --- a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > > +++ b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > > @@ -471,6 +471,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *udp_gro_receive_segment(struct list_head *head,
> > > struct sk_buff *p;
> > > unsigned int ulen;
> > > int ret = 0;
> > > + int flush;
> > >
> > > /* requires non zero csum, for symmetry with GSO */
> > > if (!uh->check) {
> > > @@ -528,7 +529,17 @@ static struct sk_buff *udp_gro_receive_segment(struct list_head *head,
> > > skb_gro_postpull_rcsum(skb, uh,
> > > sizeof(struct udphdr));
> > >
> > > - ret = skb_gro_receive(p, skb);
> > > + flush = NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->flush;
> > > +
> > > + if (NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->flush_id != 1 ||
> > > + NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->count != 1 ||
> > > + !NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->is_atomic)
> > > + flush |= NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->flush_id;
> > > + else
> > > + NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->is_atomic = false;
> > > +
> > > + if (flush || skb_gro_receive(p, skb))
> > > + ret = 1;
> >
> > UDP_L4 does not have the SKB_GSO_TCP_FIXEDID that uses is_atomic as
> > input.
> >
> > And I still don't fully internalize the flush_id logic after staring
> > at it for more than one coffee.
>
> The flush_id field is there to indicate the difference between the
> current IPv4 ID of the previous IP header. It is meant to be used in
> conjunction with the is_atomic for the frame coalescing. Basically
> after the second frame we can decide the pattern either incrementing
> IPv4 ID or fixed, so on frames 3 or later we can decide to drop the
> frame if it doesn't follow that pattern.
>
> > But even ignoring those, the flush signal of NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->flush
> > set the network layer must be followed, so ACK. Thanks for the fix.
>
> I'm not sure about the placement of this code though. That is the one
> thing that seems off to me. Specifically this seems like it should be
> done before we start the postpull, not after. It should be something
> that can terminate the flow before we attempt to aggregate the UDP
> headers.
In principle agreed that we should conclude the flush checks before
doing prep for coalescing.
In practice it does not matter? NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->csum will be ignored
if the packet gets flushed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-15 15:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-12 15:21 [PATCH net v1 0/2] net: gro: add flush/flush_id checks and fix wrong offset in udp Richard Gobert
2024-04-12 15:21 ` [PATCH net v1 1/2] net: gro: add flush check in udp_gro_receive_segment Richard Gobert
2024-04-13 18:38 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-14 17:22 ` Alexander Duyck
2024-04-15 15:00 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
2024-04-15 15:19 ` Alexander Duyck
2024-04-15 15:35 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-12 15:21 ` [PATCH net v1 2/2] net: gro: add p_off param in *_gro_complete Richard Gobert
2024-04-13 18:46 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-17 13:48 ` Richard Gobert
2024-04-17 19:39 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-18 15:12 ` Richard Gobert
2024-04-18 18:40 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-19 15:17 ` Richard Gobert
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=661d41106f996_c0c829445@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=aleksander.lobakin@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=richardbgobert@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).