netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/5] net: gro: only merge packets with incrementing or fixed outer ids

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <bb28ffa4-d91d-479a-9293-fa3aa52c57e5@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 14:27:12 +0200
From: Richard Gobert <richardbgobert@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, corbet@....net, shenjian15@...wei.com,
 salil.mehta@...wei.com, shaojijie@...wei.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch,
 saeedm@...dia.com, tariqt@...dia.com, mbloch@...dia.com, leon@...nel.org,
 ecree.xilinx@...il.com, dsahern@...nel.org, ncardwell@...gle.com,
 kuniyu@...gle.com, shuah@...nel.org, sdf@...ichev.me, ahmed.zaki@...el.com,
 aleksander.lobakin@...el.com, florian.fainelli@...adcom.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/5] net: gro: only merge packets with
 incrementing or fixed outer ids

Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Aug 2025 10:46:01 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>> It's a bit unclear what the meaning of inner and outer are in the
>> unencapsulated (i.e., normal) case. In my intuition outer only exists
>> if encapsulated, but it seems you reason the other way around: inner
>> is absent unless encapsulated. 
> 
> +1, whether the header in unencapsulted packet is inner or outer
> is always a source of unnecessary confusion. I would have also
> preferred your suggestion on v1 to use _ENCAP in the name.

Yeah, I guess that was the source of confusion. IMO, it makes more sense that
INNER is absent unless encapsulated since that seems to be the convention in
the rest of the network stack. (e.g. inner_network_header for both skb and
napi_gro_cb is only relevant for encapsulation)

I could rename the OUTER variant to simply SKB_GSO_TCP_FIXEDID so that it's
clearer that it's the default (resembling network_header). WDYT?