[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+FuTSe8VKTMO9CA2F-oNvZLbtfMqhyf+ZjruXbqz_WTrj-F1A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 20:41:12 -0600
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Yadu Kishore <kyk.segfault@...il.com>
Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Make skb_segment not to compute checksum if network
controller supports checksumming
On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 11:14 PM Yadu Kishore <kyk.segfault@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Problem:
> TCP checksum in the output path is not being offloaded during GSO
> in the following case:
> The network driver does not support scatter-gather but supports
> checksum offload with NETIF_F_HW_CSUM.
>
> Cause:
> skb_segment calls skb_copy_and_csum_bits if the network driver
> does not announce NETIF_F_SG. It does not check if the driver
> supports NETIF_F_HW_CSUM.
> So for devices which might want to offload checksum but do not support SG
> there is currently no way to do so if GSO is enabled.
>
> Solution:
> In skb_segment check if the network controller does checksum and if so
> call skb_copy_bits instead of skb_copy_and_csum_bits.
>
> Testing:
> Without the patch, ran iperf TCP traffic with NETIF_F_HW_CSUM enabled
> in the network driver. Observed the TCP checksum offload is not happening
> since the skbs received by the driver in the output path have
> skb->ip_summed set to CHECKSUM_NONE.
>
> With the patch ran iperf TCP traffic and observed that TCP checksum
> is being offloaded with skb->ip_summed set to CHECKSUM_PARTIAL.
Did you measure a cycle efficiency improvement? As discussed in the
referred email thread, the kernel uses checksum_and_copy because it is
generally not significantly more expensive than copy alone.
skb_segment already is a very complex function. New code needs to
offer a tangible benefit.
> Also tested with the patch by disabling NETIF_F_HW_CSUM in the driver
> to cover the newly introduced if-else code path in skb_segment.
>
> In-Reply-To: CABGOaVTY6BrzJTYEtVXwawzP7-D8sb1KASDWFk15v0QFaJVbUg@...l.gmail.com
This does not seem to be a commonly used tag. And indeed differs from
the actual In-Reply-To in the email headers. Perhaps
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CABGOaVTY6BrzJTYEtVXwawzP7-D8sb1KASDWFk15v0QFaJVbUg@mail.gmail.com/
> Signed-off-by: Yadu Kishore <kyk.segfault@...il.com>
> ---
> net/core/skbuff.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> index 1365a55..82a5b53 100644
> --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> @@ -3926,14 +3926,22 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb,
> goto perform_csum_check;
>
> if (!sg) {
> - if (!nskb->remcsum_offload)
> - nskb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_NONE;
> - SKB_GSO_CB(nskb)->csum =
> - skb_copy_and_csum_bits(head_skb, offset,
> - skb_put(nskb, len),
> - len, 0);
> - SKB_GSO_CB(nskb)->csum_start =
> - skb_headroom(nskb) + doffset;
> + if (!csum) {
> + if (!nskb->remcsum_offload)
> + nskb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_NONE;
> + SKB_GSO_CB(nskb)->csum =
> + skb_copy_and_csum_bits(head_skb, offset,
> + skb_put(nskb,
> + len),
> + len, 0);
> + SKB_GSO_CB(nskb)->csum_start =
> + skb_headroom(nskb) + doffset;
> + } else {
> + nskb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_PARTIAL;
Is this not already handled by __copy_skb_header above? If ip_summed
has to be initialized, so have csum_start and csum_offset. That call
should have initialized all three.
> + skb_copy_bits(head_skb, offset,
> + skb_put(nskb, len),
> + len);
> + }
> continue;
> }
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists