[RFC PATCH 0/5] LWIP stack integration

Wed May 24 16:05:25 CEST 2023

On Tue, 23 May 2023 at 03:23, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 12:40:49PM -0400, Maxim Uvarov wrote:
> > On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 10:20, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 04:33:57PM +0300, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> > > > Hi Maxim
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 22 May 2023 at 12:01, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uvarov at linaro.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > My measurements for binary after LTO looks like:
> > > > >
> > > > > U-boot WGET |  LWIP WGET + ping |  LWIP WGET| diff bytes| diff %
> > > > > 870728            |  915000                    | 912560          |
> > > 41832    | 4.8
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think you'll need to analyze that a bit more.  First of all I don't
> > > > think the '+ping' tab is useful.  What is is trying to achieve?
> > >
> >
> > To show the  difference of extra bytes if we add a ping app on top.
> >
> >
> > > > - How was LWIP compiled?
> > >
> >
> > It has a really huge configuration. I tried to turn off everything off
> > everything what can impact on size but still make http app work:
> > #define LWIP_HAVE_LOOPIF                0
> > #define LWIP_NETCONN                    0
> > #define LWIP_SOCKET                     0
> > #define SO_REUSE                        0
> > #define LWIP_STATS                      0
> > #define PPP_SUPPORT                     0
> >
> > Disabling loopback:
> > #define LWIP_NETIF_LOOPBACK 0
> > can lower to 912288 bytes.
> >
> > And it's the same compilation option (optimization for size) as the main
> > u-boot. I will do more experiments, but I think the goal is not to turn
> off
> > everything.
> >
> >
> > > > - Was ipv6 supported?
> > >
> >
> > No.  I.e. when I sent results it was enabled on the compilation stage but
> > not used. I just checked that size remains the same if IPv6 is not even
> > compiled.
> >
> >
> > > > - Can we strip it down even further?
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > There is always room for optimization. I think I tried to turn off
> > everything that is configurable with defines. I can play with disable IP
> > reassembly and things like that or figure out which functions have more
> > size and if it's possible to exclude them.
> >
> >
> > > >  In general please give as much information as you can with what we
> > > > gain in functionality from LWIP with those extra bytes of code.
> > >
> > >
> > The main idea is to reuse a maintainable IP stack outside of U-boot.
> LWIP
> > can give a nice separation between IP stack code and network application
> > code.  I.e. application should not take care about any TCP details  (SYN,
> > ACK, retransmission, reassembly etc) and should open connection and use
> > functions similar to recv() and send() to transfer data. Data means
> > application data, no network packets. And LWIP allows
> > us to do that.
> > Because LWIP has an API similar to sockets, it has to be very easy to
> port
> > a linux application to LWIP. Then you can test it with a tap device. Then
> > copy sources to U-boot, add a small integration layer (cmd command to
> > call), compile and use.
> >
> > So my suggestion was:
> > -  do not maintain new network stack code in the current U-boot. Use lwip
> > sources as an external project.  All bugs related to network stack go to
> > lwip project first, then sync with U-boot.
> > - maintain network apps code* or
> >   -- inside U-boot. Write our own code for application and maintain it
> > inside U-boot.
> >   -- inside LWIP. Add examples to LWIP which are suitable for both
> U-boot
> > and LWIP.
> >
> > * Let's define a U-boot network application as a cmd command. It might be
> > ping, wget (http or https download), telnet, arp dns etc..
> >
> > Let's consider the real use case, like HTTPS download client. We need to
> > enable TLS connection, validate certificates, then do http download.
> > Looking at the current code of wget command it's quite difficult to
> > implement this due to the application having some protol level things. On
> > the other side we can find embedTLS examples to do https download on
> > sockets. If LWIP socket API is ported then the only thing you need to do
> is
> > change socket() -> lwip_socket(), recv()->lwip_recv(),
> send()->lwip_send()
> > and etc, even function names are similar. If LWIP socket API is not
> > supported, then use callback API for recv() and send(), which are also
> > easy.
> >
> > So yes we add extra bytes, but that will allow us to write more complex
> > apps, use standard debug tools, use applications with very minimal
> > integration changes, use help from the LWIP community to fix protocol
> bugs,
> > etc..
> > Bunch of things already implemented there:
> > - ipv6
> > - dhcp
> > - snmp
> > - igmp
> > - dns
> > - tcp and udp and raw.
> > - loopback
> > - netconn
> > - socket
> > - stats
> > - ppp
> > (I just followed configurable defines).
> >
> >
> > And please make sure to disable the previous support, my guess fro that
> > > much growth is that you didn't.
> > >
> >
> > # CONFIG_PROT_TCP is not set
> > # CONFIG_PROT_UDP is not set
> > # CONFIG_UDP_CHECKSUM is not set
> > # CONFIG_UDP_FUNCTION_FASTBOOT is not set
> > # CONFIG_CMD_WGET is not set
>
> I think you need to step back and figure out a better way to measure the
> size change and growth.
>
> I am not interested in a path that long term means two networking stacks
> in U-Boot.
>
> I am not interested in massively growing the overall binary size for
> every platform.  Given how much larger just TCP support is, that's
> strongly implying a huge growth for the older use cases too.
>
> But I also suspect given the overall reputation that LWIP enjoys,
> there's something amiss here.
>
> --
> Tom
>

+cc lwip-devel@ mailing list, maybe they have something to add.

My measurements say that the current U-boot IP stack + wget command adds an
additional 9 Kbytes.
The  minimal configuration of LWIP with wget command is 30 Kbytes.
(compiled out all asserts, debugs, not used protocols etc.).

And the most bigger functions are tcp in/out itself:
 * These functions are generally called in the order (ip_input() ->)
 * tcp_input() -> * tcp_process() -> tcp_receive() (-> application).

+tcp_input                                      -    4364   +4364
https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/lwip.git/tree/src/core/tcp_in.c#n118
+tcp_receive                                    -    3444   +3444
https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/lwip.git/tree/src/core/tcp_in.c#n1154
+tcp_write                                      -    2192   +2192
https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/lwip.git/tree/src/core/tcp_out.c#n393
+ip4_reass                                      -    2096   +2096
https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/lwip.git/tree/src/core/ipv4/ip4_frag.c#n503
+tcp_output                                     -    1616   +1616
https://git.savannah.nongnu.org/cgit/lwip.git/tree/src/core/tcp_out.c#n1241

If we transfer current net commands to lwip then we can decrease the size,
because of functions reuse.
And if we turn on all features in lwip it will be about 50 Kbytes.

BR,
Maxim.