netdev - Re: Throughput regression with `tcp: refine TSO autosizing`

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: <1424773829.2192.26.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:	Tue, 24 Feb 2015 11:30:29 +0100
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@...to.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eyal Perry <eyalpe@....mellanox.co.il>
Subject: Re: Throughput regression with `tcp: refine TSO autosizing`

On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 11:24 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-02-12 at 08:48 +0100, Michal Kazior wrote:
> 
> > > Good point. I was actually thinking about it. I can try cooking a
> > > patch unless you want to do it yourself :-)
> > 
> > I've taken a look into this. The most obvious place to add the
> > timestamp for each packet would be ieee80211_tx_info (i.e. the
> > skb->cb[48]). The problem is it's very tight there. Even squeezing 2
> > bytes (allowing up to 64ms of tx completion delay which I'm worried
> > won't be enough) will be troublesome. Some drivers already use every
> > last byte of their allowance on 64bit archs (e.g. ar5523 uses entire
> > 40 bytes of driver_data).
> 
> Couldn't we just repurpose the existing skb->tstamp field for this, as
> long as the skb is fully contained within the wireless layer?
> 
> Actually, it looks like we can't, since I guess timestamping options can
> be turned on on any socket.

Actually, that creates a clone or a new skb? Hmm.

Anyway, I think we should just move the vif and hw_key pointers out of
the tx_info and into ieee80211_tx_control. That will give us plenty of
space, and they can't really be used long-term anyway? Although ... both
might be somewhat problematic for mac80211 itself? Hmm.

johannes

--
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