netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ipv6/gre: Add GRO 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: <CAKHjkjkk4ktJbh+3NJvS+PF+V1ZCKGE8ACfrOj0SE19m3-1oeA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 2 Apr 2018 15:40:56 +0300
From:   Eran Ben Elisha <eranlinuxmellanox@...il.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ipv6/gre: Add GRO support

On Sun, Apr 1, 2018 at 7:35 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 04/01/2018 06:17 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>> From: Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>
>>
>> Add GRO capability for IPv6 GRE tunnel and ip6erspan tap, via gro_cells
>> infrastructure.
>>
>> Performance testing: 55% higher badwidth.
>> Measuring bandwidth of 1 thread IPv4 TCP traffic over IPv6 GRE tunnel
>> while GRO on the physical interface is disabled.
>> CPU: Intel Xeon E312xx (Sandy Bridge)
>> NIC: Mellanox Technologies MT27700 Family [ConnectX-4]
>> Before (GRO not working in tunnel) : 2.47 Gbits/sec
>> After  (GRO working in tunnel)     : 3.85 Gbits/sec
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
>> CC: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>> ---
>
>
> Seems good, but why isn't this handled directly in GRO native layer ?
ip6_tunnel and ip6_gre do not share initialization flow functions (unlike ipv4).
Changing the ipv6 init infrastructure should not be part of this
patch. we prefer to keep this one minimal, simple and safe.
>