netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 net-next] net: introduce dev_set

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20131108042425.GA14577@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:	Fri, 8 Nov 2013 12:24:25 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, bhutchings@...arflare.com,
	christoph.paasch@...ouvain.be, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	hkchu@...gle.com, mwdalton@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next] net: introduce dev_set_forwarding()

On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 08:21:57PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 11:23 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 06:51:53PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2013-11-07 at 18:42 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > 
> > > > A normal TSO packets with 16 MSS setups a ~17 DMA descriptors,
> > > > while GSO requires 2 DMA descriptors per MSS, plus a lot of overhead
> > > > in sk_buff allocation/deallocation.
> > > 
> > > Not mentioning fact that a 64KB packet is adding latencies, since high
> > > prio packets have to wait the whole preceding 64KB packet has left the
> > > host.
> > 
> > That would be a bug in the GRO code since a high prio packet
> > shouldn't have been merged in the first place and therefore
> > the usual priority mechanism should allow it to preempt the
> > 64KB packet.
> 
> Some users install Qdisc (AQM) on their router, to decide of what is
> high priority and what is not. Their iptables or qdisc filters can be
> quite complex.
> 
> Its all TCP for example.
> 
> GRO stack cannot make this decision.
> 
> So lets say we receive on ingress a mix of high prio packets and low
> prio TCP packets. If GRO stack is able to build super big GRO packet,
> then this super big GRO packet is a head of line blocking.
> 
> At 1Gbps, a 16 MSS packet is holding the line for about 190 us.
> 
> At 45 MSS, you basically multiply by 3 this latency.
> 
> What we probably want is a way to tune this latency, not ignore the
> problem by making big GRO packets.
> 
> The only current choice for the user is to enable or disable GRO per
> ingress port.
> 
> Thats a trivial patch, but net-next is closed at this moment.

I don't know why you're fixing this problem by disabling/degrading
GRO instead of fixing the qdisc to intelligently segment the GRO
packet.

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