On 04/02/2018 08:00 AM, Eran Ben Elisha wrote: >>>> Seems good, but why isn't this handled directly in GRO native layer ? >>> ip6_tunnel and ip6_gre do not share initialization flow functions (unlike >>> ipv4). >>> Changing the ipv6 init infrastructure should not be part of this >>> patch. we prefer to keep this one minimal, simple and safe. >> >> >> >> Looking at gre_gro_receive() and gre_gro_complete() I could not see why they >> could not be copied/pasted to IPv6. > > These functions to handle GRO over GRE are already assigned in > gre_offload_init() (in net/ipv4/gre_offload.c under CONFIG_IPV6). > However without initializing the gro_cells, the receive path will not > go via napi_gro_receive path, but directly to netif_rx. > So AFAIU, only gcells->cells was missing for gro_cells_receive to > really go via GRO flow. > >> >> Maybe give more details on the changelog, it is really not obvious. > Hopefully the above filled this request. >>
Not really :/ gro_cells_receive() is not really useful with native GRO, since packet is already a GRO packet by the time it reaches ip_tunnel_rcv() or __ip6_tnl_rcv() Sure, it might be usefull if native GRO (happening on eth0 if you prefer) did not handle a particular encapsulation. gro_cell was a work around before we extended GRO to be able to decap some tunnel headers. It seems we have to extend this to also support GRE6.
