netdev - Re: [PATCH net] openvswitch: compute needed headroom for internal vports

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: <CAOrHB_C=GxDbZBdKCo0j2z-dNTKRQ6GcpWYr6qGxuF_SxughJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:44:14 -0800
From:	pravin shelar <pshelar@....org>
To:	Jesse Gross <jesse@...nel.org>
Cc:	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Flavio Leitner <fbl@...close.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] openvswitch: compute needed headroom for internal vports

On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Jesse Gross <jesse@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 4:34 PM, pravin shelar <pshelar@....org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2016-01-08 at 18:44 -0800, pravin shelar wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Jesse Gross <jesse@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>> > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 2:53 PM, pravin shelar <pshelar@....org> wrote:
>>>> >> On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 1:50 PM, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> Currently the ovs internal vports always use a default needed_headroom.
>>>> >>> This leads to a skb head copy while xmitting on ovs swith via vport
>>>> >>> that add some kind of encapsulation (gre, geneve, etc.).
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> This patch add book-keeping for the maximum needed_headroom used by
>>>> >>> the non internal vports in any dp, updating it on vport creation and
>>>> >>> deletion.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Said value is than used as needed_headroom for internal vports,
>>>> >>> avoiding the above copy.
>>>> >>>
>>>> >> Why is this done only for internal devices? In most common case of
>>>> >> traffic the packet enters OVS from tap or other netdev type vport
>>>> >> device.
>>>> >
>>>> > How would you influence the allocation for non-internal devices?
>>>>
>>>> Today there is no way of influencing this. But we could add new
>>>> skb-headroom parameter to netdev for packets that are received on the
>>>> device. This new parameter could be controlled from master devices
>>>> like OVS, Bridge, etc. To set this value we need new ndo operation. So
>>>> that it can work on devices like tap where it would just set this new
>>>> value and in case of ovs-internal or veth device, it can also update
>>>> needed_headroom.
>>>
>>> My idea was to continue working along this lines.
>>>
>>> However I thought to get there incrementally, i.e. handle internal
>>> vports only first. Can this be ok for you?
>>>
>>
>> If the final implementation is going to change alot, then I do not see
>> much value in this change going in first.
>
> Even if the code will change in the future, it seems like an
> incremental improvement that will help in some cases so I don't see
> much reason to not do this part now.

I am not sure which cases it help. Can you tell me use cases for
internal port in production?