From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat•com>
To: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat•com>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org, daniel.lezcano@free•fr,
nightnord@gmail•com, kaber@trash•net, eric.dumazet@gmail•com,
jasowang@redhat•com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mactap: Fix checksum errors for non-gso packets in bridge mode
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:26:11 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140424072611.GA31483@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <535822DE.5020704@redhat.com>
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 04:30:22PM -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> On 04/23/2014 04:10 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 03:39:44PM -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> >> On 04/23/2014 03:20 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 12:51:40PM -0400, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
> >>>> The following is a problematic configuration:
> >>>>
> >>>> VM1: virtio-net device connected to macvtap0@eth0
> >>>> VM2: e1000 device connect to macvtap1@eth0
> >>>>
> >>>> The problem is is that virtio-net supports checksum offloading
> >>>> and thus sends the packets to the host with CHECKSUM_PARTIAL set.
> >>>> On the other hand, e1000 does not support any acceleration.
> >>>>
> >>>> For small TCP packets (and this includes the 3-way handshake),
> >>>> e1000 ends up receiving packets that only have a partial checksum
> >>>> set. This causes TCP to fail checksum validation and to drop
> >>>> packets. As a result tcp connections can not be established.
> >>>>
> >>>> Commit 3e4f8b787370978733ca6cae452720a4f0c296b8
> >>>> macvtap: Perform GSO on forwarding path.
> >>>> fixes this issue for large packets wthat will end up undergoing GSO.
> >>>> This commit adds a check for the non-GSO case and attempts to
> >>>> compute the checksum for partially checksummed packets in the
> >>>> non-GSO case.
> >>>>
> >>>> CC: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@free•fr>
> >>>> CC: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash•net>
> >>>> CC: Andrian Nord <nightnord@gmail•com>
> >>>> CC: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail•com>
> >>>> CC: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat•com>
> >>>> CC: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat•com>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevic@redhat•com>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/net/macvtap.c | 7 +++++++
> >>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/macvtap.c b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
> >>>> index ff111a8..ba91084 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/net/macvtap.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/net/macvtap.c
> >>>> @@ -322,6 +322,13 @@ static rx_handler_result_t macvtap_handle_frame(struct sk_buff **pskb)
> >>>> segs = nskb;
> >>>> }
> >>>> } else {
> >>>> + /* If we receive a partial checksum and the tap side
> >>>> + * doesn't support checksum offload, compute the checksum.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> + if (skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_PARTIAL &&
> >>>> + !(features & NETIF_F_ALL_CSUM) &&
> >>>> + skb_checksum_help(skb))
> >>>> + goto drop;
> >>>
> >>> Hmm confused by NETIF_F_ALL_CSUM here.
> >>>
> >>> features come from here:
> >>> feature_mask = NETIF_F_HW_CSUM;
> >>>
> >>> if (arg & (TUN_F_TSO4 | TUN_F_TSO6)) {
> >>> if (arg & TUN_F_TSO_ECN)
> >>> feature_mask |= NETIF_F_TSO_ECN;
> >>> if (arg & TUN_F_TSO4)
> >>> feature_mask |= NETIF_F_TSO;
> >>> if (arg & TUN_F_TSO6)
> >>> feature_mask |= NETIF_F_TSO6;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> if (arg & TUN_F_UFO)
> >>> feature_mask |= NETIF_F_UFO;
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> okay so why not just check that NETIF_F_HW_CSUM is set?
> >>
> >> We can do that, but it doesn't make much difference.
> >
> > Seems cleaner to test a single bit otherwise one is left
> > wondering what happens if only one bit matches.
>
> I can certainly do a single test, but if we ever change it,
> this will be another palace that would have to change.
Hmm change what exactly? Add support for selectively
disabling checksum for specific protocols?
> The above is also what dev_start_hard_xmit() does.
Yes and I was wondering about that too, but check it out: that one
calls: netif_skb_dev_features which in turn calls harmonize_features.
And there we have:
if (skb->ip_summed != CHECKSUM_NONE &&
!can_checksum_protocol(features, skb_network_protocol(skb, &tmp))) {
features &= ~NETIF_F_ALL_CSUM;
} else if (illegal_highdma(dev, skb)) {
features &= ~NETIF_F_SG;
}
So NETIF_F_HW_CSUM is tested because it's cleared by a per-protocol
handling here which is not there in your patch.
Your patch is still correct - the reason harmonize_features is not
necessary is because tap either sets HW_CSUM or nothing,
can_checksum_protocol is always true or always false. But since we rely
on this anyway, isn't it better to make this explicit?
Alternatively let's clarify the comment here:
> >>>> + /* If we receive a partial checksum and the tap side
> >>>> + * doesn't support checksum offload, compute the checksum.
Add:
+ * Note: it doesn't matter which checksum feature to
+ * check, we either support them all or none.
> >>>> + */
Fine?
> >
> >>>
> >>> Also does it matter whether specific offloads are enabled?
> >>>
> >>
> >> No it doesn't matter at all. The packet is not a GSO packet
> >> so no other acceleration is used.
> >
> > Hmm how do we know it's not a gso packet?
> > All I see is need_gso test which means it needs segmentation.
>
> Part of netif_needs_gso() is a test for skb_is_gso(). So it
> it's gso and doesn't need segmentation (meaning the guest can
> receive large packets), then partial checksum is OK.
That is correct- thanks for the clarification.
> >
> >
> >> Also, other offloads are dependent on checksum.
> >>
> >> -vlad
> >
> > Right so what if checksum is on, but segmentation is off?
> > Not the case with e1000 today but can be with other userspace.
> >
>
> In this case, the skb will be in need to segmentation and will take
> a different branch.
>
> -vlad
> >
> >>>
> >>>> skb_queue_tail(&q->sk.sk_receive_queue, skb);
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 1.9.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-24 7:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-23 16:51 [PATCH 0/2] Fix macvtap checksum errors in bridge mode Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-23 16:51 ` [PATCH 1/2] mactap: Fix checksum errors for non-gso packets " Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-23 19:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-04-23 19:39 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-23 20:10 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2014-04-23 20:30 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-24 7:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2014-04-24 14:05 ` Vlad Yasevich
2014-04-23 16:51 ` [PATCH 2/2] Revert "macvlan : fix checksums error when we are in bridge mode" Vlad Yasevich
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=20140424072611.GA31483@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=daniel.lezcano@free$(echo .)fr \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat$(echo .)com \
--cc=kaber@trash$(echo .)net \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=nightnord@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=vyasevic@redhat$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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