netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: airoha: Add TCP LRO support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20251107171103.2ecda810@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 17:11:03 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: airoha: Add TCP LRO support

On Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:30:02 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> > On Fri, 31 Oct 2025 09:42:15 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:  
> > > Sorry for the late reply about this item.
> > > I carried out some comparison tests between GRO-only and GRO+LRO with order-2
> > > pages [0]. The system is using a 2.5Gbps link. The device is receiving a single TCP
> > > stream. MTU is set to 1500B.
> > > 
> > > - GRO only:			~1.6Gbps
> > > - GRO+LRO (order-2 pages):	~2.1Gbps
> > > 
> > > In both cases we can't reach the line-rate. Do you think the difference can justify
> > > the hw LRO support? Thanks in advance.
> > >  
> > > [0] the hw LRO requires contiguous memory pages to work. I reduced the size to
> > > order-2 from order-5 (original implementation).  
> > 
> > I think we're mostly advising about real world implications of 
> > the approach rather than nacking. I can't say for sure if potentially
> > terrible skb->len/skb->truesize ratio will matter for a router
> > application. Maybe not.
> > 
> > BTW is the device doing header-data split or the LRO frame has headers
> > and payload in a single buffer?  
> 
> According to my understanding the hw LRO is limited to a single order-x page
> containing both the headers and the payload (the hw LRO module is not capable
> of splitting the aggregated TCP segment over multiple pages).
> What we could do is disable hw LRO by default and feed hw rx queues with
> order-0 pages (current implementation). If the user enables hw LRO, we will
> free order-0 pages linked to the rx DMA descriptors and allocate order-x pages
> (e.g. order-2) for hw LRO queues. Disabling hw LRO will switch back to order-0
> pages.

Are all packets LRO-sized when it's enabled? What you describe is
definitely good, bur I was wondering if we can also use rx-buf-len
to let user select the size / order of the LRO buffers.

But the definition of rx-buf-len is that it's for _all_ rx buffers
on given queue. We'd probably need a new param if the pages are
just for lro