similar to: [PATCH stable v2 3/3] virtio_net: don't leak memory or block when too many frags

We leak an skb when there are too many frags, we also stop processing the packet in the middle, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Reported-by: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Note: this path is gone upstream, so this patch is for stable kernel only. This is on top of series: virtio-net: backport

We leak an skb when there are too many frags, we also stop processing the packet in the middle, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Reported-by: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> --- Note: this path is gone upstream, so this patch is for stable kernel only. This is on top of series: virtio-net: backport

Eric Dumazet noticed that if we encounter an error when processing a mergeable buffer, we don't dequeue all of the buffers from this packet, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Fix this issue. Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> Cc: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Acked-by: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Cc: Eric Dumazet

Eric Dumazet noticed that if we encounter an error when processing a mergeable buffer, we don't dequeue all of the buffers from this packet, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Fix this issue. Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> Cc: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Acked-by: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Cc: Eric Dumazet

Eric Dumazet noticed that if we encounter an error when processing a mergeable buffer, we don't dequeue all of the buffers from this packet, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Jason Wang noticed that we also leak a page and that we don't decrement the rq buf count, so we won't repost buffers (a resource leak). Fix both issues. Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty at

Eric Dumazet noticed that if we encounter an error when processing a mergeable buffer, we don't dequeue all of the buffers from this packet, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Jason Wang noticed that we also leak a page and that we don't decrement the rq buf count, so we won't repost buffers (a resource leak). Fix both issues. Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty at

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 08:54:02AM -0500, Jason Wang wrote: > > > ----- ???? ----- > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 05:07:25PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > When mergeable buffer were used, we only put the first page buf leave the > > > rest > > > of buffers in the virt queue. This will cause the driver could not get the > > > correct head buffer

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 05:07:25PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > When mergeable buffer were used, we only put the first page buf leave the rest > of buffers in the virt queue. This will cause the driver could not get the > correct head buffer any more. Fix this by dropping the rest of buffers for this > packet. > > The bug was introduced by commit

Commit 2613af0ed18a ("virtio_net: migrate mergeable rx buffers to page frag allocators") changed the mergeable receive buffer size from PAGE_SIZE to MTU-size, introducing a single-stream regression for benchmarks with large average packet size. There is no single optimal buffer size for all workloads. For workloads with packet size <= MTU bytes, MTU + virtio-net header-sized buffers

On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> wrote: > The virtio_net driver's mergeable receive buffer allocator > uses 4KB packet buffers. For MTU-sized traffic, SKB truesize > is > 4KB but only ~1500 bytes of the buffer is used to store > packet data, reducing the effective TCP window size > substantially. This patch addresses the

receive mergeable now handles errors internally. Do same for big and small packet paths, otherwise the logic is too hard to follow. Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> Cc: David S. Miller <davem at davemloft.net> Acked-by: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> (cherry picked from commit

receive mergeable now handles errors internally. Do same for big and small packet paths, otherwise the logic is too hard to follow. Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> Cc: David S. Miller <davem at davemloft.net> Acked-by: Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com> (cherry picked from commit

On 11/28/2013 12:31 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > Eric Dumazet noticed that if we encounter an error > when processing a mergeable buffer, we don't > dequeue all of the buffers from this packet, > the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. > > Jason Wang noticed that we also leak a page and that we don't decrement > the rq buf count, so we won't repost

----- ???? ----- > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 05:07:25PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > When mergeable buffer were used, we only put the first page buf leave the > > rest > > of buffers in the virt queue. This will cause the driver could not get the > > correct head buffer any more. Fix this by dropping the rest of buffers for > > this > > packet. > > >

----- ???? ----- > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 05:07:25PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > When mergeable buffer were used, we only put the first page buf leave the > > rest > > of buffers in the virt queue. This will cause the driver could not get the > > correct head buffer any more. Fix this by dropping the rest of buffers for > > this > > packet. > > >

Commit 2613af0ed18a ("virtio_net: migrate mergeable rx buffers to page frag allocators") changed the mergeable receive buffer size from PAGE_SIZE to MTU-size, introducing a single-stream regression for benchmarks with large average packet size. There is no single optimal buffer size for all workloads. For workloads with packet size <= MTU bytes, MTU + virtio-net header-sized buffers

Eric Dumazet noticed that if we encounter an error when processing a mergeable buffer, we don't dequeue all of the buffers from this packet, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Jason Wang noticed that we also leak a page and that we don't decrement the rq buf count, so we won't repost buffers (a resource leak). Fix both issues. Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty at

Eric Dumazet noticed that if we encounter an error when processing a mergeable buffer, we don't dequeue all of the buffers from this packet, the result is almost sure to be loss of networking. Jason Wang noticed that we also leak a page and that we don't decrement the rq buf count, so we won't repost buffers (a resource leak). Fix both issues. Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty at

On 12/17/2013 08:16 AM, Michael Dalton wrote: > The virtio-net driver currently uses netdev_alloc_frag() for GFP_ATOMIC > mergeable rx buffer allocations. This commit migrates virtio-net to use > per-receive queue page frags for GFP_ATOMIC allocation. This change unifies > mergeable rx buffer memory allocation, which now will use skb_refill_frag() > for both atomic and GFP-WAIT

On 12/17/2013 08:16 AM, Michael Dalton wrote: > The virtio-net driver currently uses netdev_alloc_frag() for GFP_ATOMIC > mergeable rx buffer allocations. This commit migrates virtio-net to use > per-receive queue page frags for GFP_ATOMIC allocation. This change unifies > mergeable rx buffer memory allocation, which now will use skb_refill_frag() > for both atomic and GFP-WAIT