From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/10] udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2018 15:41:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b69077c93ec047845d4b22a57fa6f89b63c0639c.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181022112451.GH3823@gauss3.secunet.de>
On Mon, 2018-10-22 at 13:24 +0200, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2018 at 04:25:12PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> >
> > +#define UDO_GRO_CNT_MAX 64
>
> Maybe better UDP_GRO_CNT_MAX?
Oops, typo. Yes, sure, will address in the next iteration.
> Btw. do we really need this explicit limit?
> We should not get more than 64 packets during
> one napi poll cycle.
With HZ >= 1000, gro_flush happens at most once per jiffies: we can
have much more than 64 packets per segment, with appropriate pkt len.
>
> > +static struct sk_buff *udp_gro_receive_segment(struct list_head *head,
> > + struct sk_buff *skb)
> > +{
> > + struct udphdr *uh = udp_hdr(skb);
> > + struct sk_buff *pp = NULL;
> > + struct udphdr *uh2;
> > + struct sk_buff *p;
> > +
> > + /* requires non zero csum, for simmetry with GSO */
> > + if (!uh->check) {
> > + NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->flush = 1;
> > + return NULL;
> > + }
>
> Why is the requirement of checksums different than in
> udp_gro_receive? It's not that I care much about UDP
> packets without a checksum, but you would not need
> to implement your own loop if the requirement could
> be the same as in udp_gro_receive.
uhm....
AFAIU, we need to generated aggregated packets that UDP GSO is able to
process/segment. I was unable to get a nocsum packet segment (possibly
PEBKAC) so I enforced that condition on the rx path.
@Willem: did I see ghost here? is UDP_SEGMENT fine with no checksum
segment?
> > +
> > + /* pull encapsulating udp header */
> > + skb_gro_pull(skb, sizeof(struct udphdr));
> > + skb_gro_postpull_rcsum(skb, uh, sizeof(struct udphdr));
> > +
> > + list_for_each_entry(p, head, list) {
> > + if (!NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->same_flow)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + uh2 = udp_hdr(p);
> > +
> > + /* Match ports only, as csum is always non zero */
> > + if ((*(u32 *)&uh->source != *(u32 *)&uh2->source)) {
> > + NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->same_flow = 0;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Terminate the flow on len mismatch or if it grow "too much".
> > + * Under small packet flood GRO count could elsewhere grow a lot
> > + * leading to execessive truesize values
> > + */
> > + if (!skb_gro_receive(p, skb) &&
> > + NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->count > UDO_GRO_CNT_MAX)
>
> This allows to merge UDO_GRO_CNT_MAX + 1 packets.
Thanks, will address in the next iteration.
Cheers,
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-22 22:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-19 14:25 [RFC PATCH v2 00/10] udp: implement GRO support Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 01/10] udp: implement complete book-keeping for encap_needed Paolo Abeni
2018-10-22 16:06 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-25 13:00 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 02/10] udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets Paolo Abeni
2018-10-21 20:06 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 10:13 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-22 15:15 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 11:24 ` Steffen Klassert
2018-10-22 13:41 ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2018-10-22 15:51 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 03/10] udp: add support for UDP_GRO cmsg Paolo Abeni
2018-10-21 20:07 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 15:44 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 04/10] ip: factor out protocol delivery helper Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 05/10] ipv6: " Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 06/10] udp: cope with UDP GRO packet misdirection Paolo Abeni
2018-10-21 20:08 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 10:29 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-22 16:00 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 11:43 ` Steffen Klassert
2018-10-22 12:51 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-23 10:29 ` Steffen Klassert
2018-10-22 19:04 ` Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan
2018-10-23 7:59 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-24 0:55 ` Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 07/10] selftests: add GRO support to udp bench rx program Paolo Abeni
2018-10-21 20:08 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 10:31 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 08/10] selftests: conditionally enable XDP support in udpgso_bench_rx Paolo Abeni
2018-10-21 20:09 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 10:37 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 09/10] selftests: add some benchmark for UDP GRO Paolo Abeni
2018-10-19 14:25 ` [RFC PATCH v2 10/10] selftests: add functionals test " Paolo Abeni
2018-10-21 20:09 ` Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 10:46 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-21 20:05 ` [RFC PATCH v2 00/10] udp: implement GRO support Willem de Bruijn
2018-10-22 9:41 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-23 12:10 ` Steffen Klassert
2018-10-23 12:22 ` Paolo Abeni
2018-10-24 10:55 ` Steffen Klassert
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=b69077c93ec047845d4b22a57fa6f89b63c0639c.camel@redhat.com \
--to=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).