[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACGkMEuUF1vDNWbL9dRr1ZM4vFTLwc3j9uB-66451U1NvQ+2EA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 15:16:23 +0800
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>,
Yan Vugenfirer <yan@...nix.com>, davem <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, mst <mst@...hat.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] tun: indicate support for USO feature
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 4:35 AM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > > But surprisingly when TUN receives TUN_F_UFO it does not propagate it
> > > anywhere, there is no corresponding NETIF flag.
> >
> > (It looks like I drop the community and other ccs accidentally, adding
> > them back and sorry)
> >
> > Actually, there is one, NETIF_F_GSO_UDP.
> >
> > Kernel used to have NETIF_F_UFO, but it was removed due to bugs and
> > the lack of real hardware support. Then we found it breaks uABI, so
> > Willem tries to make it appear for userspace again, and then it was
> > renamed to NETIF_F_GSO_UDP.
> >
> > But I think it's a bug that we don't proporate TUN_F_UFO to NETIF
> > flag, this is a must for the driver that doesn't support
> > VIRTIO_NET_F_GUEST_UFO. I just try to disable all offloads and
> > mrg_rxbuf, then netperf UDP_STREAM from host to guest gives me bad
> > length packet in the guest.
> >
> > Willem, I think we probably need to fix this.
>
> We had to add back support for the kernel to accept UFO packets from
> userspace over tuntap.
>
> The kernel does not generate such packets, so a guest should never be
> concerned of receiving UFO packets.
That's my feeling as well.
But when I:
1) turn off all guest gso feature and mrg rx buffers, in this case
virtio-net will only allocate 1500 bytes for each packet
2) doing netperf (UDP_STREAM) from local host to guest, I see packet
were truncated in the guest
>
> Perhaps i'm misunderstanding the problem here.
>
I will re-check and get back to you.
(probably need a while since I will not be online for the next week).
Thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists