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: <20190919094106.GM2879@gauss3.secunet.de>
Date:   Thu, 19 Sep 2019 11:41:06 +0200
From:   Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
CC:     Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 0/5] Support fraglist GRO/GSO

On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 12:17:08PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 3:25 AM 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.
> >
> > Patch 3 adds a netdev software feature set that defaults to off
> > and assigns the new listifyed GRO feature flag to it.
> >
> > Patch 4 adds the core infrastructure to do fraglist GRO/GSO.
> >
> > Patch 5 enables UDP to use fraglist GRO/GSO if configured and no
> > GRO supported socket is found.
> 
> Very nice feature, Steffen.

Thanks!

> Aside from questions around performance,
> my only question is really how this relates to GSO_BY_FRAGS.
> 
> More specifically, whether we can remove that in favor of using your
> new skb_segment_list. That would actually be a big first step in
> simplifying skb_segment back to something manageable.

As Marcelo pointed out, this should be doable.

Thanks for all your review. I'll incorporate your comments and do
RFC v4, so that we hopefully can start the mainlining process as
soon as net-next opens again.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ