netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: introduce gro_frag_list

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]

Message-ID: <20131030041959.GA3162@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:	Wed, 30 Oct 2013 12:19:59 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, christoph.paasch@...ouvain.be,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, hkchu@...gle.com, mwdalton@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: introduce gro_frag_list_enable sysctl

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 09:16:17PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> The thing is this only matters for hosts receiving at line rate on few
> TCP flows.
> 
> A router should not build too big GRO packets, as it adds latencies.
> 
> Really, we had to make TSO packets being auto sized, lets not add the
> syndrome again.
> 
> So I do not really understand David concern about emitting a warning.
> 
> If a machine is used as a router, building GRO packets of 17 MSS is
> absolutely fine.

It's not just routers you know, we use the same code on bridges
as part of virtualisation.  So it absolutely does matter.

In fact this is why I wrote GRO in the first place, to make it
work for virtualisation.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html