netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>,
	Josh Hunt <johunt@akamai.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com
Cc: willemb@google.com, aaron.f.brown@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] i40e: Add UDP segmentation offload support
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:59:05 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <26f3dcc3-2d54-2ddc-729b-193f2c3c5b6b@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bb71ee9658e7fcacde2c1bcdc258524e75474b7b.camel@linux.intel.com>



On 10/11/2019 10:56 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Fri, 2019-10-11 at 10:39 -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote:
>>
>> On 10/11/2019 9:53 AM, Josh Hunt wrote:
>>> Based on a series from Alexander Duyck this change adds UDP segmentation
>>> offload support to the i40e driver.
>>>
>>> CC: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
>>> CC: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Josh Hunt <johunt@akamai.com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c |  1 +
>>>    drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c | 12 +++++++++---
>>>    2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c
>>> index 6031223eafab..56f8c52cbba1 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_main.c
>>> @@ -12911,6 +12911,7 @@ static int i40e_config_netdev(struct i40e_vsi *vsi)
>>>    			  NETIF_F_GSO_IPXIP6		|
>>>    			  NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL	|
>>>    			  NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL_CSUM	|
>>> +			  NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_L4		|
>>>    			  NETIF_F_SCTP_CRC		|
>>>    			  NETIF_F_RXHASH		|
>>>    			  NETIF_F_RXCSUM		|
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c
>>> index e3f29dc8b290..b8496037ef7f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/i40e/i40e_txrx.c
>>> @@ -2960,10 +2960,16 @@ static int i40e_tso(struct i40e_tx_buffer *first, u8 *hdr_len,
>>>    
>>>    	/* remove payload length from inner checksum */
>>>    	paylen = skb->len - l4_offset;
>>> -	csum_replace_by_diff(&l4.tcp->check, (__force __wsum)htonl(paylen));
>>>    
>>> -	/* compute length of segmentation header */
>>> -	*hdr_len = (l4.tcp->doff * 4) + l4_offset;
>>> +	if (skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_type & SKB_GSO_UDP_L4) {
>>> +		csum_replace_by_diff(&l4.udp->check, (__force __wsum)htonl(paylen));
>>> +		/* compute length of segmentation header */
>>> +		*hdr_len = sizeof(*l4.udp) + l4_offset;
>>> +	} else {
>>> +		csum_replace_by_diff(&l4.tcp->check, (__force __wsum)htonl(paylen));
>>> +		/* compute length of segmentation header */
>>> +		*hdr_len = (l4.tcp->doff * 4) + l4_offset;
>>> +	}
>>
>> Is it guaranteed that gso_type can be either UDP or TCP only if we reach
>> here? Don't we need to handle the case where it is neither and return
>> from this function?
> 
> We should only reach here if a supported gso_type value is in the packet,
> otherwise we should end up with software segmentation taking care of it
> and clearing the gso_size value if I recall correctly.
> 
> Otherwise the code should have been checking for non-TCP types ages ago,
> and we would have experienced all sorts of bugs.

Yes. Sounds good. Thanks for the clarification.

> 
> - Alex
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-11 18:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-11 16:53 [PATCH v3 0/3] igb, ixgbe, i40e UDP segmentation offload support Josh Hunt
2019-10-11 16:53 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] igb: Add " Josh Hunt
2019-10-25  3:26   ` Brown, Aaron F
2019-10-11 16:53 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] ixgbe: " Josh Hunt
2019-10-16 16:43   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Bowers, AndrewX
2019-10-18 18:04     ` Josh Hunt
2019-10-11 16:53 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] i40e: " Josh Hunt
2019-10-11 17:39   ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-11 17:56     ` Alexander Duyck
2019-10-11 18:59       ` Samudrala, Sridhar [this message]
2019-10-16 16:44   ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Bowers, AndrewX

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=26f3dcc3-2d54-2ddc-729b-193f2c3c5b6b@intel.com \
    --to=sridhar.samudrala@intel.com \
    --cc=aaron.f.brown@intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
    --cc=johunt@akamai.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=willemb@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).