netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v3 0/5] Support fraglist GRO/GSO

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]

Date:   Thu, 19 Sep 2019 15:37:47 +0300
From:   Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To:     Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 0/5] Support fraglist GRO/GSO

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 2:48 PM Steffen Klassert
<steffen.klassert@...unet.com> wrote:
> This patchset adds support to do GRO/GSO by chaining packets
> of the same flow at the SKB frag_list pointer. This avoids
> the overhead to merge payloads into one big packet, and
> on the other end, if GSO is needed it avoids the overhead
> of splitting the big packet back to the native form.
>
> Patch 1 Enables UDP GRO by default.
>
> Patch 2 adds a netdev feature flag to enable listifyed GRO,
> this implements one of the configuration options discussed
> at netconf 2019.
[..]

The slide say that linked packets travel together though the stack.

This sounds somehow similar to the approach suggested by Ed
for skb lists. I wonder what we can say on cases where each of the
approaches would function better.

Or.