From: Paul Barker <paul.barker.ct@bp.renesas.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: "Sergey Shtylyov" <s.shtylyov@omp.ru>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"Niklas Söderlund" <niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se>,
"Biju Das" <biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com>,
"Claudiu Beznea" <claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com>,
"Lad Prabhakar" <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>,
"Mitsuhiro Kimura" <mitsuhiro.kimura.kc@renesas.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/2] net: ravb: Fix R-Car RX frame size limit
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 15:03:21 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <933ffa58-8092-4768-993d-cd62897d203d@bp.renesas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b1c10539-4d47-4752-8613-785b0ad83f5e@lunn.ch>
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1868 bytes --]
On 16/06/2024 02:23, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 15, 2024 at 11:30:38AM +0100, Paul Barker wrote:
>> The RX frame size limit should not be based on the current MTU setting.
>> Instead it should be based on the hardware capabilities.
>
> This is a bit odd. MTU is Maximum Transmission Unit, so clearly is
> about Tx. MRU does not really exist. Does TCP allow for asymmetric
> MTU/MRU? Does MTU discovery work correctly for this?
>
> In general, it seems like drivers implement min(MTU, MRU) and nothing
> more. Do you have a real use case for this asymmetry?
>
> Andrew
Hi Andrew,
This change is based on my understanding of MTU/MRU, on the specs of the
RZ SoCs I'm working with (primarily RZ/G2L family, RZ/G3S and RZ/G2H)
and on some testing. My goal here is just to make the capabilities of
the hardware available to users.
For the RZ/G2L family and RZ/G3S, we can only support an MTU of up to
1500 bytes, but we can receive frames of up to (IIRC) 8192 bytes. I have
tested sending jumbo frames to an RZ/G2L device using both iperf3 and
ping and I see no errors.
* For iperf3 RX testing, the RZ/G2L is only responding with acks. These
are small regardless of the size of the received packets, so the
mis-match in MTU between the two hosts causes no issue.
* For ping testing, the RZ/G2L will give a fragmented response to the
ping packet which the other host can reassemble.
For the RZ/G2H, we support sending frames of up to 2047 bytes but we can
receive frames of up to 4092 bytes. The driver will need a few more
changes to handle reception of packets >2kB in size, but this is
something we can do in the near future.
Is there any reason why we shouldn't support this? I am by no means an
expert in the Linux networking internals so there may be things I'm
missing.
Thanks,
--
Paul Barker
[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3577 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-17 14:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-15 10:30 [net-next PATCH 0/2] Fix maximum TX/RX frame sizes in ravb driver Paul Barker
2024-06-15 10:30 ` [net-next PATCH 1/2] net: ravb: Fix maximum MTU for GbEth devices Paul Barker
2024-06-15 12:38 ` Niklas Söderlund
2024-06-17 19:38 ` Sergey Shtylyov
2024-06-17 19:45 ` Sergey Shtylyov
2024-08-13 13:37 ` Paul Barker
2024-06-18 0:07 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-08-13 12:53 ` Paul Barker
2024-06-15 10:30 ` [net-next PATCH 2/2] net: ravb: Fix R-Car RX frame size limit Paul Barker
2024-06-15 13:04 ` Niklas Söderlund
2024-06-17 14:20 ` Paul Barker
2024-06-16 1:23 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-06-17 14:03 ` Paul Barker [this message]
2024-06-17 14:29 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-08-13 13:29 ` Paul Barker
2024-08-13 14:06 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-08-15 9:10 ` Paul Barker
2024-06-17 20:18 ` Sergey Shtylyov
2024-06-16 19:22 ` [net-next PATCH 0/2] Fix maximum TX/RX frame sizes in ravb driver Sergey Shtylyov
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=933ffa58-8092-4768-993d-cd62897d203d@bp.renesas.com \
--to=paul.barker.ct@bp.renesas.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com \
--cc=claudiu.beznea.uj@bp.renesas.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mitsuhiro.kimura.kc@renesas.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=niklas.soderlund+renesas@ragnatech.se \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com \
--cc=s.shtylyov@omp.ru \
/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®