On 2023-08-31 08:58:51 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:

On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 1:28 AM Mohamed Khalfella
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

        do {
                struct sk_buff *nskb;
                skb_frag_t *nskb_frag;

@@ -4465,6 +4471,10 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb,
                    (skb_headlen(list_skb) == len || sg)) {
                        BUG_ON(skb_headlen(list_skb) > len);

+                       nskb = skb_clone(list_skb, GFP_ATOMIC);
+                       if (unlikely(!nskb))
+                               goto err;
+

This patch is quite complex to review, so I am asking if this part was
really needed ?

Unfortunately the patch is complex because I try to avoid calling
skb_orphan_frags() in the middle of processing these frags. Otherwise
it would be much harder to implement because as reallocated frags do not
map 1:1 with existing frags as Willem mentioned.

<1>  : You moved here <2> and <3>

<2> was moved here because skb_clone() calls skb_orphan_frags(). By
moving this up we do not need to call skb_orphan_frags() for list_skb
and we can start to use nr_frags and frags without worrying their value
is going to change.

<3> was moved here because <2> was moved here. Fail fast if we can not
clone list_skb.

If this is not strictly needed, please keep the code as is to ease
code review...

quoted

                        i = 0;
                        nfrags = skb_shinfo(list_skb)->nr_frags;
                        frag = skb_shinfo(list_skb)->frags;

@@ -4483,12 +4493,8 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb,
                                frag++;
                        }

-                       nskb = skb_clone(list_skb, GFP_ATOMIC);

<2>

quoted

                        list_skb = list_skb->next;

-                       if (unlikely(!nskb))
-                               goto err;
-

<3>

quoted

                        if (unlikely(pskb_trim(nskb, len))) {
                                kfree_skb(nskb);
                                goto err;

@@ -4564,12 +4570,16 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb,
                skb_shinfo(nskb)->flags |= skb_shinfo(head_skb)->flags &
                                           SKBFL_SHARED_FRAG;

-               if (skb_orphan_frags(frag_skb, GFP_ATOMIC) ||
-                   skb_zerocopy_clone(nskb, frag_skb, GFP_ATOMIC))
+               if (skb_zerocopy_clone(nskb, list_skb, GFP_ATOMIC))

Why using list_skb here instead of frag_skb ?
Again, I have to look at the whole thing to understand why you did this.

Oops, this is a mistake. It should be frag_skb. Will fix it run the test
one more time and post v3.