netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/3] sctp: add GSO support

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: <20160129011828.GE6602@mrl.redhat.com>
Date:	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 23:18:28 -0200
From:	Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
To:	Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@...chi.franken.de>
Cc:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"brouer@...hat.com" <brouer@...hat.com>,
	"alexander.duyck@...il.com" <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
	"alexei.starovoitov@...il.com" <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
	"borkmann@...earbox.net" <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
	"marek@...udflare.com" <marek@...udflare.com>,
	"hannes@...essinduktion.org" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	"fw@...len.de" <fw@...len.de>,
	"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"john.r.fastabend@...el.com" <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
	"linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/3] sctp: add GSO support

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 12:36:05AM +0100, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> 
> > On 28 Jan 2016, at 22:03, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 06:54:06PM +0100, Michael Tuexen wrote:
> >>> On 28 Jan 2016, at 14:51, David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> >>>> Sent: 27 January 2016 17:07
> >>>> This patchset is merely a RFC for the moment. There are some
> >>>> controversial points that I'd like to discuss before actually proposing
> >>>> the patches.
> >>> 
> >>> You also need to look at how a 'user' can actually get SCTP to
> >>> merge data chunks in the first place.
> >>> 
> >>> With Nagle disabled (and it probably has to be since the data flow
> >>> is unlikely to be 'command-response' or 'unidirectional bulk')
> >>> it is currently almost impossible to get more than one chunk
> >>> into an ethernet frame.
> >>> 
> >>> Support for MSG_MORE would help.
> >> What about adding support for the explicit EOR mode as specified in
> >> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6458#section-8.1.26
> > 
> > Seizing the moment to clarify my understanding on that. :)
> > Such multiple calls to send system calls will result in a single data
> > chunk. Is that so? That's what I get from that text and also from this
> No. It results in a single user message. This means you can send
> a user message larger than the send buffer size. How the user message
> is fragmented in DATA chunks is transparent to the upper layer.
> 
> Does this make things clearer?

I think so, yes. So it allows delaying setting the Ending fragment bit
until the application set SCTP_EOR. All the rest before this stays as
before: first send() will generate a chunk with Beginning bit set and
may generate some other middle-fragments (no B nor E bit set) if
necessary, second to N-1 call to send will generate only middle
fragments, while the last send, with SCTP_EOF, will then set the Ending
fragment in the last one. Right?

Thanks,
Marcelo

> 
> Best regards
> Michael
> > snippet:
> > "Sending a message using sendmsg() is atomic unless explicit end of
> > record (EOR) marking is enabled on the socket specified by sd (see
> > Section 8.1.26)."
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Marcelo
> > 
> >> Best regards
> >> Michael
> >>> 
> >>> Given the current implementation you can get almost the required
> >>> behaviour by turning nagle off and on repeatedly.
> >>> 
> >>> I did wonder whether the queued data could actually be picked up
> >>> be a Heartbeat chunk that is probing a different remote address
> >>> (which would be bad news).
> >>> 
> >>> 	David
> >>> 
> >>> --
> >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in
> >>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> >>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >>> 
> >> 
> > 
>