netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/7] net: ethtool: add support for configuring tcp-data-split-thresh

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: <CAHS8izM1H-wjNUepcmFzWvpUuTZvt89_Oba=KaDpeReuMURvQw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 11:25:36 -0700
From: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
To: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, 
	edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, 
	donald.hunter@...il.com, corbet@....net, michael.chan@...adcom.com, 
	kory.maincent@...tlin.com, andrew@...n.ch, maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com, 
	danieller@...dia.com, hengqi@...ux.alibaba.com, ecree.xilinx@...il.com, 
	przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com, hkallweit1@...il.com, ahmed.zaki@...el.com, 
	paul.greenwalt@...el.com, rrameshbabu@...dia.com, idosch@...dia.com, 
	asml.silence@...il.com, kaiyuanz@...gle.com, willemb@...gle.com, 
	aleksander.lobakin@...el.com, dw@...idwei.uk, sridhar.samudrala@...el.com, 
	bcreeley@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/7] net: ethtool: add support for configuring tcp-data-split-thresh

On Thu, Oct 3, 2024 at 9:07 AM Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com> wrote:
>
> The tcp-data-split-thresh option configures the threshold value of
> the tcp-data-split.
> If a received packet size is larger than this threshold value, a packet
> will be split into header and payload.

Why do you need this? devmem TCP will always not work with unsplit
packets. Seems like you always want to set thresh to 0 to support
something like devmem TCP.

Why would the user ever want to configure this? I can't think of a
scenario where the user wouldn't want packets under X bytes to be
unsplit.