Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
> On 1. Apr 2021, at 02:18, David Ahern wrote: > > On 3/31/21 7:10 AM, Norman Maurer wrote: >> Friendly ping… >> >> As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original commit I >> do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as well. That’s also >> the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the commit message / subject >> for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug and not a new feature. >> >> > > I agree that it should be added to net > > If you do not see it here: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/ > > you need to re-send and clearly mark it as [PATCH net]. Make sure it has > a Fixes tag. > Done: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20210401065917.78025-1-norman_mau...@apple.com/ Thanks a lot of the review and help. Bye Norman
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
On 3/31/21 7:10 AM, Norman Maurer wrote: > Friendly ping… > > As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original commit I > do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as well. That’s also > the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the commit message / subject > for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug and not a new feature. > > I agree that it should be added to net If you do not see it here: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/ you need to re-send and clearly mark it as [PATCH net]. Make sure it has a Fixes tag.
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 15:10 +0200, Norman Maurer wrote: > As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original > commit I do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as > well. That’s also the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the > commit message / subject for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug > and not a new feature. I have no strong opinion against that (sorry, I hoped that was clear in my reply). Please go ahead. Thanks, Paolo
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
Friendly ping… As this missing change was most likely an oversight in the original commit I do think it should go into 5.12 and subsequently stable as well. That’s also the reason why I didn’t send a v2 and changed the commit message / subject for the patch. For me it clearly is a bug and not a new feature. Thanks Norman > On 26. Mar 2021, at 13:22, Paolo Abeni wrote: > > On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 11:22 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote: >> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni wrote: >>> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post >>> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork). >> >> I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure >> how I would “obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me >> some pointers I am happy to do so. > > Well, I actually gave you a bad advice about fiddling with patchwork. > > The autoritative documentation: > > Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst > > (inside the kernel tree) suggests to avoid it. > > Just posting a v2 will suffice. > > Thanks! > > Paolo >
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
Hi,
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 20:56 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> From: Norman Maurer
>>
>> Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
>> getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
>> retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
>> case for UDP_GRO
>>
>> Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
>> Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer
>
> The patch LGTM, but please cc the blamed commit author in when you add
> a 'Fixes' tag (me in this case ;)
Noted for the next time…
>
> Also please specify a target tree, either 'net' or 'net-next', in the
> patch subj. Being declared as a fix, this should target 'net'.
>
Ok noted
> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure how I would
“obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me some pointers I am
happy to do so.
>
> Side note: I personally think this is more a new feature (is adds
> getsockopt support for UDP_GRO) than a fix, so I would not have added
> the 'Fixes' tag and I would have targeted net-next, but it's just my
> opinion.
I see… For me it seemed more like a bug as I can’t think of a reason why only
setsockopt should be supported for an option but not getsockopt. But it may be
just my opinion :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paolo
>
Thanks
Norman
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
Hi,
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 20:56 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> From: Norman Maurer
>>
>> Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
>> getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
>> retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
>> case for UDP_GRO
>>
>> Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
>> Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer
>
> The patch LGTM, but please cc the blamed commit author in when you add
> a 'Fixes' tag (me in this case ;)
Noted for the next time…
>
> Also please specify a target tree, either 'net' or 'net-next', in the
> patch subj. Being declared as a fix, this should target 'net'.
>
Ok noted
> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure how I would
“obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me some pointers I am
happy to do so.
>
> Side note: I personally think this is more a new feature (is adds
> getsockopt support for UDP_GRO) than a fix, so I would not have added
> the 'Fixes' tag and I would have targeted net-next, but it's just my
> opinion.
I see… For me it seemed more like a bug as I can’t think of a reason why only
setsockopt should be supported for an option but not getsockopt. But it may be
just my opinion :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paolo
>
Thanks
Norman
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 11:22 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote: > On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni wrote: > > One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post > > a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork). > > I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure > how I would “obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me > some pointers I am happy to do so. Well, I actually gave you a bad advice about fiddling with patchwork. The autoritative documentation: Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.rst (inside the kernel tree) suggests to avoid it. Just posting a v2 will suffice. Thanks! Paolo
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
Hi,
> On 26. Mar 2021, at 10:36, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 20:56 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> From: Norman Maurer
>>
>> Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
>> getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
>> retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
>> case for UDP_GRO
>>
>> Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
>> Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer
>
> The patch LGTM, but please cc the blamed commit author in when you add
> a 'Fixes' tag (me in this case ;)
Noted for the next time…
>
> Also please specify a target tree, either 'net' or 'net-next', in the
> patch subj. Being declared as a fix, this should target 'net'.
>
Ok noted
> One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
> a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
I am quite new to contribute patches to the kernel so I am not sure how I would
“obsolete” this patch and make a v2. If you can give me some pointers I am
happy to do so.
>
> Side note: I personally think this is more a new feature (is adds
> getsockopt support for UDP_GRO) than a fix, so I would not have added
> the 'Fixes' tag and I would have targeted net-next, but it's just my
> opinion.
I see… For me it seemed more like a bug as I can’t think of a reason why only
setsockopt should be supported for an option but not getsockopt. But it may be
just my opinion :)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paolo
>
Thanks
Norman
Re: [PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...)
Hello,
On Thu, 2021-03-25 at 20:56 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
> From: Norman Maurer
>
> Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
> getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
> retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
> case for UDP_GRO
>
> Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
> Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer
The patch LGTM, but please cc the blamed commit author in when you add
a 'Fixes' tag (me in this case ;)
Also please specify a target tree, either 'net' or 'net-next', in the
patch subj. Being declared as a fix, this should target 'net'.
One thing you can do to simplifies the maintainer's life, would be post
a v2 with the correct tag (and ev. obsolete this patch in patchwork).
Side note: I personally think this is more a new feature (is adds
getsockopt support for UDP_GRO) than a fix, so I would not have added
the 'Fixes' tag and I would have targeted net-next, but it's just my
opinion.
Cheers,
Paolo
[PATCH] udp: Add support for getsockopt(..., ..., UDP_GRO, ..., ...);
From: Norman Maurer
Support for UDP_GRO was added in the past but the implementation for
getsockopt was missed which did lead to an error when we tried to
retrieve the setting for UDP_GRO. This patch adds the missing switch
case for UDP_GRO
Fixes: e20cf8d3f1f7 ("udp: implement GRO for plain UDP sockets.")
Signed-off-by: Norman Maurer
---
net/ipv4/udp.c | 4
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp.c b/net/ipv4/udp.c
index 4a0478b17243..99d743eb9dc4 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/udp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/udp.c
@@ -2754,6 +2754,10 @@ int udp_lib_getsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level, int
optname,
val = up->gso_size;
break;
+ case UDP_GRO:
+ val = up->gro_enabled;
+ break;
+
/* The following two cannot be changed on UDP sockets, the return is
* always 0 (which corresponds to the full checksum coverage of UDP). */
case UDPLITE_SEND_CSCOV:
--
2.30.2
