netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/2] sctp: Add GSO support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 02 May 2016 19:16:14 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	marcelo.leitner@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, vyasevich@...il.com, nhorman@...driver.com,
	linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, David.Laight@...LAB.COM,
	alexander.duyck@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] sctp: Add GSO support

From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 18:33:31 -0300

> This patchset adds sctp GSO support.
> 
> Performance tests indicates that increases throughput by 10% if using
> bigger chunk sizes, specially if bigger than MTU. For small chunks, it
> doesn't help much if not using heavy firewall rules.
> 
> For small chunks it will probably be of more use once we get something
> like MSG_MORE as David Laight had suggested.
> 
> I believe I could address all comments from the RFC attempt.

Are these packets idempotent?

Ie. if we GRO a bunch of SCTP frames on receive and that GRO frame is
forwarded rather than received locally, is the same exact packet
stream emitted on transmit?