[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+a-d6e3_6PpKckC149_O87GWeUAhe6ztOh62b1fcvBbw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2023 09:51:39 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Richard Gobert <richardbgobert@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
dsahern@...nel.org, alexanderduyck@...com, lucien.xin@...il.com,
lixiaoyan@...gle.com, iwienand@...hat.com, leon@...nel.org,
ye.xingchen@....com.cn, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] gro: optimise redundant parsing of packets
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 9:46 AM Richard Gobert <richardbgobert@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Currently the IPv6 extension headers are parsed twice: first in
> ipv6_gro_receive, and then again in ipv6_gro_complete.
>
> By using the new ->transport_proto field, and also storing the size of the
> network header, we can avoid parsing extension headers a second time in
> ipv6_gro_complete (which saves multiple memory dereferences and conditional
> checks inside ipv6_exthdrs_len for a varying amount of extension headers in
> IPv6 packets).
>
> The implementation had to handle both inner and outer layers in case of
> encapsulation (as they can't use the same field). I've applied a similar
> optimisation to Ethernet.
>
> Performance tests for TCP stream over IPv6 with a varying amount of
> extension headers demonstrate throughput improvement of ~0.7%.
>
> In addition, I fixed a potential future problem:
I would remove all this block.
We fix current problems, not future hypothetical ones.
> - The call to skb_set_inner_network_header at the beginning of
> ipv6_gro_complete calculates inner_network_header based on skb->data by
> calling skb_set_inner_network_header, and setting it to point to the
> beginning of the ip header.
> - If a packet is going to be handled by BIG TCP, the following code block
> is going to shift the packet header, and skb->data is going to be
> changed as well.
>
> When the two flows are combined, inner_network_header will point to the
> wrong place - which might happen if encapsulation of BIG TCP will be
> supported in the future.
>
> The fix is to place the whole encapsulation branch after the BIG TCP code
> block. This way, if encapsulation of BIG TCP will be supported,
> inner_network_header will still be calculated with the correct value of
> skb->data.
We do not support encapsulated BIG TCP yet.
We will do this later, and whoever does it will make sure to also support GRO.
> Also, by arranging the code that way, the optimisation does not
> add an additional branch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Gobert <richardbgobert@...il.com>
> ---
>
Can you give us a good explanation of why extension headers are used exactly ?
I am not sure we want to add code to GRO for something that 99.99% of
us do not use.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists