From: Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>
To: Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@de.ibm.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <themann@de.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-ppc <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Marcus Eder <meder@de.ibm.com>, Thomas Klein <tklein@de.ibm.com>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/3] lro: Generic LRO for TCP traffic
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:01:38 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070712080137.GA25699@2ka.mipt.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200707111621.34376.ossthema@de.ibm.com>
Hi, Jan-Bernd.
I have couple of comments over implementation besides one you saw
previous time.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 04:21:34PM +0200, Jan-Bernd Themann (ossthema@de.ibm.com) wrote:
> +static int lro_tcp_ip_check(struct sk_buff *skb, struct iphdr *iph,
> + struct tcphdr *tcph, struct net_lro_desc *lro_desc)
> +{
> + /* check ip header: packet length */
> + if (ntohs(iph->tot_len) > skb->len)
> + return -1;
> +
> + if (TCP_PAYLOAD_LENGTH(iph, tcph) == 0)
> + return -1;
> +
> + if (iph->ihl != IPH_LEN_WO_OPTIONS)
> + return -1;
> +
> + if (tcph->cwr || tcph->ece || tcph->urg || !tcph->ack || tcph->psh
> + || tcph->rst || tcph->syn || tcph->fin)
> + return -1;
I think you do not want to break lro frame because of push flag - it is
pretty common flag, which does not brak processing (and I'm not sure if
it has any special meaning this days).
> + if (INET_ECN_is_ce(ipv4_get_dsfield(iph)))
> + return -1;
> +
> + if (tcph->doff != TCPH_LEN_WO_OPTIONS
> + && tcph->doff != TCPH_LEN_W_TIMESTAMP)
> + return -1;
> +
> + /* check tcp options (only timestamp allowed) */
> + if (tcph->doff == TCPH_LEN_W_TIMESTAMP) {
> + u32 *topt = (u32 *)(tcph + 1);
> +
> + if (*topt != htonl((TCPOPT_NOP << 24) | (TCPOPT_NOP << 16)
> + | (TCPOPT_TIMESTAMP << 8)
> + | TCPOLEN_TIMESTAMP))
> + return -1;
> +
> + /* timestamp should be in right order */
> + topt++;
> + if (lro_desc && (ntohl(lro_desc->tcp_rcv_tsval) > ntohl(*topt)))
> + return -1;
This still does not handle wrapping over 32 bits.
What about
if (lro_desc && after(ntohl(lro_desc->tcp_rcv_tsval), ntohl(*topt)))
return -1;
> + /* timestamp reply should not be zero */
> + topt++;
> + if (*topt == 0)
> + return -1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +static struct net_lro_desc *lro_get_desc(struct net_lro_mgr *mgr,
> + struct net_lro_desc *lro_arr,
> + struct iphdr *iph,
> + struct tcphdr *tcph)
> +{
> + struct net_lro_desc *lro_desc = NULL;
> + struct net_lro_desc *tmp;
> + int max_desc = mgr->max_desc;
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < max_desc; i++) {
> + tmp = &lro_arr[i];
> + if (tmp->active)
> + if (!lro_check_tcp_conn(tmp, iph, tcph)) {
> + lro_desc = tmp;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
Ugh... What about tree structure or hash here?
> + for (i = 0; i < max_desc; i++) {
> + if(!lro_arr[i].active) {
> + lro_desc = &lro_arr[i];
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
> +
> +out:
> + return lro_desc;
> +}
> +int __lro_proc_skb(struct net_lro_mgr *lro_mgr, struct sk_buff *skb,
> + struct vlan_group *vgrp, u16 vlan_tag, void *priv)
> +{
> + struct net_lro_desc *lro_desc;
> + struct iphdr *iph;
> + struct tcphdr *tcph;
> +
> + if (!lro_mgr->get_ip_tcp_hdr
> + || lro_mgr->get_ip_tcp_hdr(skb, &iph, &tcph, priv))
> + goto out;
> +
> + lro_desc = lro_get_desc(lro_mgr, lro_mgr->lro_arr, iph, tcph);
> + if (!lro_desc)
> + goto out;
There is no protection of the descriptor array from accessing from
different CPUs. Is it forbidden to share net_lro_mgr structure?
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-12 9:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-11 14:21 Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-07-12 8:01 ` Evgeniy Polyakov [this message]
2007-07-12 11:54 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
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=20070712080137.GA25699@2ka.mipt.ru \
--to=johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=meder@de.ibm.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ossthema@de.ibm.com \
--cc=raisch@de.ibm.com \
--cc=stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com \
--cc=themann@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tklein@de.ibm.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®