netdev - Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next RESENT v3] ethtool: ice: Support for RSS settings to GTP from ethtool

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: <92958c7b-7e5f-4e25-819f-4e52f9ffcf7b@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2024 10:59:40 +0100
From: Marcin Szycik <marcin.szycik@...ux.intel.com>
To: takeru hayasaka <hayatake396@...il.com>
Cc: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
 Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 vladimir.oltean@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, laforge@...monks.org,
 intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next RESENT v3] ethtool: ice:
 Support for RSS settings to GTP from ethtool

On 30.01.2024 07:39, takeru hayasaka wrote:
> Hi Marcin-san
> Thanks for your review!
> 
>> Do I understand correctly that all gtpu* include TEID? Maybe write it here.
> Yes, that's correct.
> 
>> It would be nice to see a link to the patch that added GTP and 'e' flag support
> to ethtool itself ("ethtool: add support for rx-flow-hash gtp").
> I will send you the link.
> The one I sent earlier was outdated, so I've updated it to match this patch.
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240130053742.946517-1-hayatake396@gmail.com/
> 
>> gtpc(4|6) doesn't include TEID, so what is its purpose?
> In GTPC communication, there is no TEID in the CSR (Create Session Request).
> Therefore, there are cases of GTPC that do not include TEID.

The way I understand it now, this patch (and the ethtool one) adds hashing on
TEID field in GTP* headers. So I wanted to ask why do we have a case (gtpc(4|6))
that doesn't include TEID? Do we hash on other fields in this header?

> 
>> s/TEID(4byte)/TEID (4bytes)/
>> Also, I think two newlines should remain here.
> I will correct the TEID notation in the next patch!

Thanks,
Marcin

---8<---