From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BBA0C49ED7 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 13:46:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2171121907 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 13:46:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="ruUqoj6t" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390507AbfISNqF (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 09:46:05 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f194.google.com ([209.85.215.194]:46524 "EHLO mail-pg1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390501AbfISNqF (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 09:46:05 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f194.google.com with SMTP id a3so1923234pgm.13 for ; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:46:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xT/Ac22RP7xQJF3vYZ5r8xP7sJ8V+g3GXS0E2MweKOw=; b=ruUqoj6tXfnU8R9nTgl76wsmwKCll2un9hl3caw20hNI/0Gy/S9wl6REFe2RhzF3Sh 13d8HWsrivHa5y9YP0XEHYpyvbIdCRz9EiDEa+eb3egnjL1+gy5olYV5mrZ+WNKHi6VG JlbaUAg5yB/kIOrxBpktf9RKi2Wer7e5InqSGg9PYz1UEI8KoX532oAUrcQIJoIo4w3W MPYuqGpKcYuO+mx6+rDMzXpBTTSw0+7JmrTHqNCuvJqtySzuOw7iETTVGNTwEw/NhyFR Vt3YU4Co8tyKuy1A85dLP4TAxKuo1ppPyCKlRQtjllabK5bzGjXW0fLdznD+2tGzzSGw tu8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=xT/Ac22RP7xQJF3vYZ5r8xP7sJ8V+g3GXS0E2MweKOw=; b=YjSkcEGju6Y/yQ92rUmZ1NzMFx8QJ77CLjUHPPcQwrfcaaW5f+wr+8EfWgOeyIO3W9 wCT7kECeB1Tjcq/ONJoNExO/fm7qvBVD2blDmUCx0jYS5TBMUxiBc7DTYs2cEWAmBLsu Ar3m8A6/14H3KAc+iooeyodG89t9zMeloyiGalQHUkO5QCW8agvXgvu0AGOOC9VZBlsA qhT2hwX1B+Ivjt6Z1mWo5PTLaXhap5XT4TJi2bhKshRTaHSOq87aOWWvvJNZc9CZ/PFb Lmmsn3O0ooWWYzRBMks1AX55xWH3DV/+mtPlTxDm21n5Vd/zTPFXsEKPKQCPm/y8Oo3l mTXg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVyRGto4wGTr4ggqOJdOV60GCqSzWb++SQJN0V/CuObF3pbxoUz mfn791Ur/3MvxUoRYex7xuhQqK0A X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz8B1IZwrUm/PJmEHupUDk2t4S6wRQLOa6u099jjpM8Ne4a83gye+tnOHWrqWLINNl/xn3VqA== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:910c:: with SMTP id 12mr7659515pfh.166.1568900764411; Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:46:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.86.235] (c-73-241-150-70.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [73.241.150.70]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h15sm9424652pgn.76.2019.09.19.06.46.02 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: force a PSH flag on TSO packets To: Or Gerlitz , Eric Dumazet Cc: "David S . Miller" , netdev , Eric Dumazet , Soheil Hassas Yeganeh , Neal Cardwell , Yuchung Cheng , Daniel Borkmann , Tariq Toukan References: <20190910214928.220727-1-edumazet@google.com> From: Eric Dumazet Message-ID: Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 06:46:01 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 9/19/19 5:17 AM, Or Gerlitz wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:54 AM Eric Dumazet wrote: >> When tcp sends a TSO packet, adding a PSH flag on it >> reduces the sojourn time of GRO packet in GRO receivers. >> >> This is particularly the case under pressure, since RX queues >> receive packets for many concurrent flows. >> >> A sender can give a hint to GRO engines when it is >> appropriate to flush a super-packet, especially when pacing > > Hi Eric, > > Is this correct that we add here the push flag for the tcp header template > from which all the tcp headers for SW GSO packets will be generated? > > Wouldn't that cause a too early flush on GRO engines at the receiver side? If a TSO engine is buggy enough to add the PSH on all the segments, it needs to be fixed urgently :)