netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] vxlan: GRO support at tunnel layer

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 29 Jun 2015 08:45:57 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	Ramu Ramamurthy <sramamur@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] vxlan: GRO support at tunnel layer

On 06/28/2015 10:20 AM, Ramu Ramamurthy wrote:
> Rick, in your test, are you seeing gro becoming effective on the
> vxlan interface with the 82599ES nic ? (ie, tcpdump on the vxlan
> interface shows larger frames than the mtu of that interface, and
> kernel trace shows vxlan_gro_receive() being hit)
>
> Throughputs of 5.5 Gbps (or the improved 7Gbs) leads me to suspect
> that gro is still not effective in your test on the vxlan interface
> with the 82588ES nic - Because, when vxlan gro became effective with
> the patch I suggested earlier, I could see throughput of ~8.5 Gbps on
> that nic.

For the 5.X gbit/s test, where I am not getting GRO, I am seeing 1398 
byte data packets when I trace vxlan0.

For the other direction, at 7ish Gbit/s I am seeing 64XXX byte packets 
on vxlan0, with the occasional 25XXX byte packet.  If I disable gro on 
that receiving vxlan0 interface, the throughput is more like 4.X Gbit/s

happy benchmarking,

rick
--
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