From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Subject: [QUESTION] Doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic in tcpv4 gro
 process
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 17:09:40 +0800
Message-ID: <ca367d0d-b0d7-3357-7196-c0da17ef9890@huawei.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
        "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "linuxarm@huawei.com" <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
        <yuxiaowu@hisilicon.com>, <wzhen.wang@hisilicon.com>,
        Xuehuahu <xuehuahu@hisilicon.com>
To: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.35]:40689 "EHLO huawei.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1753474AbdLTJJw (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 20 Dec 2017 04:09:52 -0500
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

Hi, all
	I have some doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic when
analyzing the tcpv4 gro process:

Firstly we set NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic to 1 in dev_gro_receive:
https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.15-rc4/source/net/core/dev.c#L4838

And then in inet_gro_receive, we check the NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic
before setting NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic according to IP_DF bit in the ip header:
https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.15-rc4/source/net/ipv4/af_inet.c#L1319

struct sk_buff **inet_gro_receive(struct sk_buff **head, struct sk_buff *skb)
{
.....................
	for (p = *head; p; p = p->next) {
........................

		/* If the previous IP ID value was based on an atomic
		 * datagram we can overwrite the value and ignore it.
		 */
		if (NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic)                      //we check it here
			NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->flush_id = flush_id;
		else
			NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->flush_id |= flush_id;
	}

	NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic = !!(iph->frag_off & htons(IP_DF));  //we set it here
	NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->flush |= flush;
	skb_set_network_header(skb, off);
................................
}

My question is whether we should check the NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic or NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->is_atomic?
If we should check NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic, then maybe it is unnecessary because it is alway true.
If we should check NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->is_atomic, maybe there is a bug here.

So what is the logic here? I am just start analyzing the gro, maybe I miss something obvious here.