Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-26 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 8:30 PM Willem de Bruijn wrote: > > On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 1:47 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > > > > > > > > On May 25, 2019, at 8:20 AM, Willem de Bruijn > > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 6:01 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>> On May 24,

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-26 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 1:47 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > > > > On May 25, 2019, at 8:20 AM, Willem de Bruijn > > wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 6:01 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> On May 24, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Willem de Bruijn > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> It is the last

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-25 Thread Fred Klassen
> On May 23, 2019, at 2:59 PM, Willem de Bruijn > wrote:what exactly is the issue with IP_TOS? > > If I understand correctly, the issue here is that the new 'P' option > that polls on the error queue times out. This is unrelated to > specifying TOS bits? Without zerocopy or timestamps, no

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-25 Thread Fred Klassen
> On May 23, 2019, at 2:39 PM, Willem de Bruijn > wrote: > Zerocopy notification reference count is managed in skb_segment. That > should work. > I’m trying to understand the context of reference counting in skb_segment. I assume that there is an opportunity to optimize the count of

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-25 Thread Fred Klassen
> On May 23, 2019, at 2:59 PM, Willem de Bruijn > wrote: > what exactly is the issue with IP_TOS? > > If I understand correctly, the issue here is that the new 'P' option > that polls on the error queue times out. This is unrelated to > specifying TOS bits? Without zerocopy or timestamps, no

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-25 Thread Fred Klassen
> On May 25, 2019, at 8:20 AM, Willem de Bruijn > wrote: > > On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 6:01 PM Fred Klassen wrote: >> >> >> >>> On May 24, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Willem de Bruijn >>> wrote: >>> >>> It is the last moment that a timestamp can be generated for the last >>> byte, I don't see

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-25 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 6:01 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > > > > On May 24, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Willem de Bruijn > > wrote: > > > > It is the last moment that a timestamp can be generated for the last > > byte, I don't see how that is "neither the start nor the end of a GSO > > packet”. > > My

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-24 Thread Fred Klassen
> On May 24, 2019, at 12:29 PM, Willem de Bruijn > wrote: > > It is the last moment that a timestamp can be generated for the last > byte, I don't see how that is "neither the start nor the end of a GSO > packet”. My misunderstanding. I thought TCP did last segment timestamping, not last

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-24 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 12:34 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > > Interesting. TCP timestamping takes the opposite choice and does > > timestamp the last byte in the sendmsg request. > > > > I have a difficult time with the philosophy of TX timestamping the last > segment. The actual timestamp occurs

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-24 Thread Fred Klassen
> Interesting. TCP timestamping takes the opposite choice and does > timestamp the last byte in the sendmsg request. > I have a difficult time with the philosophy of TX timestamping the last segment. The actual timestamp occurs just before the last segment is sent. This is neither the start nor

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-23 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 9:38 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > > Thanks for the report. > > > > Zerocopy notification reference count is managed in skb_segment. That > > should work. > > > > Support for timestamping with the new GSO feature is indeed an > > oversight. The solution is similar to how TCP

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-23 Thread Fred Klassen
> Thanks for the report. > > Zerocopy notification reference count is managed in skb_segment. That > should work. > > Support for timestamping with the new GSO feature is indeed an > oversight. The solution is similar to how TCP associates the timestamp > with the right segment in

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-23 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 5:09 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > Fixes an issue where TX Timestamps are not arriving on the error queue > when UDP_SEGMENT CMSG type is combined with CMSG type SO_TIMESTAMPING. > This can be illustrated with an updated updgso_bench_tx program which > includes the '-T'

Re: [PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-23 Thread Willem de Bruijn
On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 5:09 PM Fred Klassen wrote: > > Fixes an issue where TX Timestamps are not arriving on the error queue > when UDP_SEGMENT CMSG type is combined with CMSG type SO_TIMESTAMPING. > This can be illustrated with an updated updgso_bench_tx program which > includes the '-T'

[PATCH net 1/4] net/udp_gso: Allow TX timestamp with UDP GSO

2019-05-23 Thread Fred Klassen
Fixes an issue where TX Timestamps are not arriving on the error queue when UDP_SEGMENT CMSG type is combined with CMSG type SO_TIMESTAMPING. This can be illustrated with an updated updgso_bench_tx program which includes the '-T' option to test for this condition. ./udpgso_bench_tx -4ucTPv -S