netdev - Re: Large performance regression with 6in4 tunnel (sit)

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: <bcd6c5eb-8a47-6e34-96fc-a1c5bba0e033@gmx.com>
Date:   Mon, 28 Nov 2016 00:22:15 +0800
From:   Eli Cooper <elicooper@....com>
To:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Large performance regression with 6in4 tunnel (sit)

Hi Stephen,


On 2016/11/27 10:02, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Eli,
>
> On Sun, 27 Nov 2016 11:54:41 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
>> On Fri, 25 Nov 2016 14:05:04 +0800 Eli Cooper <elicooper@....com> wrote:
>>> I think this is similar to the bug I fixed in commit ae148b085876
>>> ("ip6_tunnel: Update skb->protocol to ETH_P_IPV6 in ip6_tnl_xmit()").
>>>
>>> I can reproduce a similar problem by applying xfrm to sit traffic.
>>> TSO/GSO packets are dropped when IPSec is enabled, and IPv6 throughput
>>> drops to 10s of Kbps. I am not sure if this is the same issue you
>>> experienced, but I wrote a patch that fixed at least the issue I had.
>>>
>>> Could you test the patch I sent to the mailing list just now?  
>> Thanks for the patch!
>>
>> Its a bit tricky to test since the problem only occurs in a production
>> machine (I tried reproducing in a VM, but the problem did not occur),
That's probably because the ethernet NIC in your VM does not support
segmentation offloading. You could, however, try reproducing it on
another (real) machine with the same driver.
>> but I will try to just rebuild the sit module and see if I can insert
>> the modified one.
> OK, I tried your patch and unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have
> worked ... I still get the large packets dropped and resent smaller.
>
It's a shame ... In my case, large packets are dropped only when xfrm is
in effect (therefore another output path is taken), and probably that's
not your case. Well, on the plus side, at least you reminded me that sit
device also needs to update skb's protocol.

Thanks,
Eli