netdev - Re: Generic TSO (was Re: [net-next PATCH 0/2] GENEVE/VXLAN: Enable outer Tx checksum by default)

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: <CALx6S37P+gVA_O7vxBjGMxHpY69Cx2aL3E79ptvGkRW4L2x5Ug@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 11 Mar 2016 12:16:06 -0800
From:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
To:	Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc:	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Generic TSO (was Re: [net-next PATCH 0/2] GENEVE/VXLAN: Enable
 outer Tx checksum by default)

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com> wrote:
> On 11/03/16 19:57, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com> wrote:
>>> Tom,
>>>
>>> Are you planning to / working on implementing this?  If not, I might have a
>>> crack at it; I've talked to our firmware guys and (provisionally) we think
>>> we can support it in current sfc hardware.
>>> Or were there any blocking problems raised in the thread?  My understanding
>>> of the IP ID issue was that it only matters for the inner frame, because
>>> the rest aren't TCP (so hopefully no-one is doing SLHC on them).  But I may
>>> have missed something.
>>>
>> Right, then the interface would need to just include the offset of the
>> IP ID. But doesn't this break using LCO with GSO though-- i.e. the
>> outer checksum and inner checksum still need to be updated per packet
>> so we need to tell device where outer checksum(s) is.
> No, outer checksum shouldn't change: IP ID is protected by inner IP header
> checksum, which device will edit.  No?

Right, the interface would probably still need offset to the IPv4 hdr?

>
> -Ed