On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 02:05:06PM -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 08:29:05PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > > > > I would like to bring up some problems with the current GSO > > implementation in SCTP. > > > > The most important for me right now is that SCTP uses > > "skb_gro_receive()" to build "GSO" frames :-( > > > > Really it just ends up using the slow path (basically, label 'merge' > > and onwards). > > > > So, using a GRO helper to build GSO packets is not great. > > Okay. > > > > > I want to make major surgery here and the only way I can is if > > it is exactly the GRO demuxing path that uses skb_gro_receive(). > > > > Those paths pass in the list head from the NAPI struct that initiated > > the GRO code paths. That makes it easy for me to change this to use a > > list_head or a hash chain. > > > > Probably in the short term SCTP should just have a private helper that > > builds the frag list, appending 'skb' to 'head'. > > > > In the long term, SCTP should use the page frags just like TCP to > > append the data when building GSO frames. Then it could actually be > > offloaded and passed into drivers without linearizing. > > Sounds like a plan. Shouldn't be too hard to do it. > (I'm out on PTO, btw)
Xin will work on this, mean while at least. Thanks Xin. > > Thanks, > Marcelo >
