From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from nbd.name (nbd.name [46.4.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9F46613C9A9; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 10:24:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.4.11.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714472648; cv=none; b=Q6m8F1RM0IcNlkYAEiAMl2dzkysHJzvuBb/vayh+im6XOsTeg+m9obA2wvL8rS6GLfPOa9MYznZnT2LmUkb1CfFZ9rDHszpYW60RZbWoyGJbbC4gUlNhoTGtJcBFQd28vS2qV19IXVT09FwZ9Ae2Ue/hvAlrZdL4N25eWuRdS20= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714472648; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+MFexaJbpSMwTWSnIHH5vnHOlwmWoklXLMdCQXminoQ=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=C9uKNsCPGC5zB1d4NZKDQaCwrEE3/L5rdndBhoOvEtQ317lwKJ+EqGuxDbO7uhZp2rZtqy6tJgoVMYY4yrIc4WUdfu9mkCaeeiV90jGSGrlPPaQ2wWGIwgL97QNytJdX3MuRXHpEhui4NdjlXDeHCQ5//+x/kL0KMyxgqWBlmcU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=nbd.name; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=nbd.name; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nbd.name header.i=@nbd.name header.b=QekGRbRV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.4.11.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=nbd.name Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=nbd.name Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nbd.name header.i=@nbd.name header.b="QekGRbRV" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nbd.name; s=20160729; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=kjZA1V1xyHNaOMbVHyEyXScL1QCT+bsaH3gS+8qzZ/I=; b=QekGRbRV7/rJqAZQO25Wd9MED5 579e3bYIselVop5rDJg0Y66AMj9qr+P72Ba57tb3vgHjkRBuPc+dywl00NVFzEH5t4BLDVvN7aeqv 8RtD3u7SaqXcwuaTt2V01PP16G5So5MHVn5kCVOCJ4KgBMlR8Fopqr013SK5FchtOkv8=; Received: from p54ae9c93.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([84.174.156.147] helo=nf.local) by ds12 with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1s1keP-00AETz-1b; Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:23:53 +0200 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 12:23:52 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next v4 6/6] net: add heuristic for enabling TCP fraglist GRO To: Paolo Abeni , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet , "David S. Miller" , David Ahern , Jakub Kicinski Cc: willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20240427182305.24461-1-nbd@nbd.name> <20240427182305.24461-7-nbd@nbd.name> From: Felix Fietkau Content-Language: en-US Autocrypt: addr=nbd@nbd.name; keydata= xsDiBEah5CcRBADIY7pu4LIv3jBlyQ/2u87iIZGe6f0f8pyB4UjzfJNXhJb8JylYYRzIOSxh ExKsdLCnJqsG1PY1mqTtoG8sONpwsHr2oJ4itjcGHfn5NJSUGTbtbbxLro13tHkGFCoCr4Z5 Pv+XRgiANSpYlIigiMbOkide6wbggQK32tC20QxUIwCg4k6dtV/4kwEeiOUfErq00TVqIiEE AKcUi4taOuh/PQWx/Ujjl/P1LfJXqLKRPa8PwD4j2yjoc9l+7LptSxJThL9KSu6gtXQjcoR2 vCK0OeYJhgO4kYMI78h1TSaxmtImEAnjFPYJYVsxrhay92jisYc7z5R/76AaELfF6RCjjGeP wdalulG+erWju710Bif7E1yjYVWeA/9Wd1lsOmx6uwwYgNqoFtcAunDaMKi9xVQW18FsUusM TdRvTZLBpoUAy+MajAL+R73TwLq3LnKpIcCwftyQXK5pEDKq57OhxJVv1Q8XkA9Dn1SBOjNB l25vJDFAT9ntp9THeDD2fv15yk4EKpWhu4H00/YX8KkhFsrtUs69+vZQwc0cRmVsaXggRmll dGthdSA8bmJkQG5iZC5uYW1lPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJGoeQnAhsjBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYCAwEC HgECF4AACgkQ130UHQKnbvXsvgCgjsAIIOsY7xZ8VcSm7NABpi91yTMAniMMmH7FRenEAYMa VrwYTIThkTlQzsFNBEah5FQQCACMIep/hTzgPZ9HbCTKm9xN4bZX0JjrqjFem1Nxf3MBM5vN CYGBn8F4sGIzPmLhl4xFeq3k5irVg/YvxSDbQN6NJv8o+tP6zsMeWX2JjtV0P4aDIN1pK2/w VxcicArw0VYdv2ZCarccFBgH2a6GjswqlCqVM3gNIMI8ikzenKcso8YErGGiKYeMEZLwHaxE Y7mTPuOTrWL8uWWRL5mVjhZEVvDez6em/OYvzBwbkhImrryF29e3Po2cfY2n7EKjjr3/141K DHBBdgXlPNfDwROnA5ugjjEBjwkwBQqPpDA7AYPvpHh5vLbZnVGu5CwG7NAsrb2isRmjYoqk wu++3117AAMFB/9S0Sj7qFFQcD4laADVsabTpNNpaV4wAgVTRHKV/kC9luItzwDnUcsZUPdQ f3MueRJ3jIHU0UmRBG3uQftqbZJj3ikhnfvyLmkCNe+/hXhPu9sGvXyi2D4vszICvc1KL4RD aLSrOsROx22eZ26KqcW4ny7+va2FnvjsZgI8h4sDmaLzKczVRIiLITiMpLFEU/VoSv0m1F4B FtRgoiyjFzigWG0MsTdAN6FJzGh4mWWGIlE7o5JraNhnTd+yTUIPtw3ym6l8P+gbvfoZida0 TspgwBWLnXQvP5EDvlZnNaKa/3oBes6z0QdaSOwZCRA3QSLHBwtgUsrT6RxRSweLrcabwkkE GBECAAkFAkah5FQCGwwACgkQ130UHQKnbvW2GgCeMncXpbbWNT2AtoAYICrKyX5R3iMAoMhw cL98efvrjdstUfTCP2pfetyN In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 30.04.24 12:12, Paolo Abeni wrote: > On Sat, 2024-04-27 at 20:23 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> When forwarding TCP after GRO, software segmentation is very expensive, >> especially when the checksum needs to be recalculated. >> One case where that's currently unavoidable is when routing packets over >> PPPoE. Performance improves significantly when using fraglist GRO >> implemented in the same way as for UDP. >> >> When NETIF_F_GRO_FRAGLIST is enabled, perform a lookup for an established >> socket in the same netns as the receiving device. While this may not >> cover all relevant use cases in multi-netns configurations, it should be >> good enough for most configurations that need this. >> >> Here's a measurement of running 2 TCP streams through a MediaTek MT7622 >> device (2-core Cortex-A53), which runs NAT with flow offload enabled from >> one ethernet port to PPPoE on another ethernet port + cake qdisc set to >> 1Gbps. >> >> rx-gro-list off: 630 Mbit/s, CPU 35% idle >> rx-gro-list on: 770 Mbit/s, CPU 40% idle >> >> Signe-off-by: Felix Fietkau >> --- >> net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> net/ipv6/tcpv6_offload.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 67 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c >> index 87ae9808e260..3e9b8c6f9c8c 100644 >> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c >> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c >> @@ -407,6 +407,36 @@ void tcp_gro_complete(struct sk_buff *skb) >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL(tcp_gro_complete); >> >> +static void tcp4_check_fraglist_gro(struct list_head *head, struct sk_buff *skb, >> + struct tcphdr *th) >> +{ >> + const struct iphdr *iph; >> + struct sk_buff *p; >> + struct sock *sk; >> + struct net *net; >> + int iif, sdif; >> + >> + if (!(skb->dev->features & NETIF_F_GRO_FRAGLIST)) > > Should we add an 'unlikely()' here to pair with unlikely(is_flist) in > *gro_receive / *gro_complete? Not sure if unlikely() will make any difference here. I think it makes more sense in the other places than here. > Should this test be moved into the caller, to avoid an unconditional > function call in the ipv6 code? The function is already called from tcp4_gro_receive, which is only called by IPv4 code. Also, since it's a static function called in only one place, it gets inlined by the compiler (at least in my builds). Not sure what unconditional function call you're referring to. - Felix