netdev - Re: VLAN HW accel, performance advantage?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:08:40 +0200
From:	Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: VLAN HW accel, performance advantage?

Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com> wrote on 2013/09/03 15:50:16:
> 
> On Tue, 2013-09-03 at 11:05 +0200, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
> > I am considering impl. VLAN HW acceleration in Freescales ucc_geth 
driver 
> > to improve
> > performance, primarily for bridged interfaces.
> >  I am hoping the community has some insights as to what performance 
gains 
> > one
> > could expect?
> 
> At the moment you need to do VLAN RX offload (or fake it in software) to
> take advantage of GRO for VLAN-encapsulated packets.  Other than that, I
> don't think it makes a lot of difference in most situations.
> 
> Ben.

Thanks Ben

I figured one would avoid some memmoves if the tag was extracted and as we 
got
a fairly slow CPU (some 300 MHZ MPC 8321) one should gain some performance 
but not so then.

I am not familiar with GRO( and its friends) but I am guessing it won't 
help
the bridge function or reduce stress from packet storms?

 Jocke

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html