From: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>
To: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@dev.mellanox.co.il>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/mlx4_en: CHECKSUM_COMPLETE support for fragments
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2018 11:06:15 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c43b222-f736-412b-e87c-017610fc97df@mellanox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALzJLG-BEORd+YgBqk1E1PFd8fjzDkUDQGP29ApgMaQXTPJxqw@mail.gmail.com>
On 30/03/2018 3:34 AM, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
>> Refine the RX check summing handling to propagate the
>> hardware provided checksum so that we do not have to
>> compute it later in software.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
>> Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
>> Cc: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c | 10 ++++------
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
>> index 05787efef492b1c0c6ce540ef73647fad91ce282..5c613c6663da51a4ae792eeb4d8956b54655786b 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
>> @@ -821,14 +821,12 @@ int mlx4_en_process_rx_cq(struct net_device *dev, struct mlx4_en_cq *cq, int bud
>> skb_record_rx_queue(skb, cq_ring);
>>
>> if (likely(dev->features & NETIF_F_RXCSUM)) {
>> - if (cqe->status & cpu_to_be16(MLX4_CQE_STATUS_TCP |
>> - MLX4_CQE_STATUS_UDP)) {
>> + if ((cqe->status & cpu_to_be16(MLX4_CQE_STATUS_TCP |
>> + MLX4_CQE_STATUS_UDP)) &&
>> + (cqe->status & cpu_to_be16(MLX4_CQE_STATUS_IPOK)) &&
>> + cqe->checksum == cpu_to_be16(0xffff)) {
>> bool l2_tunnel;
>>
>
> LGTM, this code even aligns better with the mlx4 HW documentation:
>
> "When L4_CSUM field is not supported, L4 checksum for TCP/UDP packets
> can be validated by: (IP_OK && (TCP || UDP)) && (checksum ==
> 0xFFFF))."
>
Hi,
Thanks Eric for your patch.
Thanks Saeed for your review while I'm off-work.
In IP fragments, MLX4_CQE_STATUS_IPOK is not set in cqe->status.
This patch suggests falling back to CHECKSUM_COMPLETE instead of
CHECKSUM_NONE.
Looks good to me.
> in the code we don't even consider L4_CSUM at the moment, As a future
> patch, it could be a nice acceleration for the above 3 steps
> condition.
>
Right. Good idea. I'll add it to plans.
> Small comment, if we expect that cqe->checksum is NOT likely to be
> 0xffff for UDP/TCP packets, maybe it is better performance wise to
> move (cqe->checksum == cpu_to_be16(0xffff)) to be evaluated first in
> the condition.
>
It _is_ likely for common TCP/UDP (no IP fragments).
Let's keep it this way.
>> - if (!((cqe->status & cpu_to_be16(MLX4_CQE_STATUS_IPOK)) &&
>> - cqe->checksum == cpu_to_be16(0xffff)))
>> - goto csum_none;
>> -
>> l2_tunnel = (dev->hw_enc_features & NETIF_F_RXCSUM) &&
>> (cqe->vlan_my_qpn & cpu_to_be32(MLX4_CQE_L2_TUNNEL));
>> ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
>> --
>> 2.17.0.rc1.321.gba9d0f2565-goog
>>
Acked-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@mellanox.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-04-01 8:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-27 21:21 [PATCH net-next] net/mlx4_en: CHECKSUM_COMPLETE support for fragments Eric Dumazet
2018-03-29 18:07 ` David Miller
2018-03-30 0:44 ` Saeed Mahameed
2018-03-30 3:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2018-03-30 0:34 ` Saeed Mahameed
2018-04-01 8:06 ` Tariq Toukan [this message]
2018-04-01 16:39 ` Eric Dumazet
2018-04-01 17:57 ` David Miller
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=8c43b222-f736-412b-e87c-017610fc97df@mellanox.com \
--to=tariqt@mellanox.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=saeedm@dev.mellanox.co.il \
--cc=willemb@google.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