netdev - Re: [next-queue PATCH 0/3] Add support for GSO partial to Intel NIC drivers

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 9 Apr 2016 08:41:41 -0700
From:	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Cc:	Alexander Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
	Jesse Gross <jesse@...nel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [next-queue PATCH 0/3] Add support for GSO partial to Intel NIC drivers

On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 11:59 PM, Jeff Kirsher
<jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-04-08 at 17:06 -0400, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> So these are the patches needed to enable tunnel segmentation
>> offloads on
>> the igb, igbvf, ixgbe, and ixgbevf drivers.  In addition this patch
>> extends
>> the i40e and i40evf drivers to include segmentation support for
>> tunnels
>> with outer checksums.
>>
>> The net performance gain for these patches are pretty significant.
>> In the
>> case of i40e a tunnel with outer checksums showed the following
>> improvement:
>> Throughput Throughput  Local Local   Result
>>            Units       CPU   Service Tag
>>                        Util  Demand
>>                        %
>> 14066.29   10^6bits/s  3.49  0.651   "before"
>> 20618.16   10^6bits/s  3.09  0.393   "after"
>>
>> For ixgbe similar results were seen:
>> Throughput Throughput  Local  Local   Result
>>            Units       CPU    Service Tag
>>                        Util   Demand
>>                        %
>> 12879.89   10^6bits/s  10.00  0.763   "before"
>> 14286.77   10^6bits/s  5.74   0.395   "after"
>>
>> These patches all rely on the TSO_MANGLEID and GSO_PARTIAL patches so
>> I
>> would not recommend applying them until those patches have first been
>> applied.
>
> Sorry I did not see this until after I tried applying your series. :-(
>
> Maybe the two dependent patches should have been in the series, so I
> and others do not waste their time.  Or not send this until the two
> patches were accepted.

Sorry I meant to send these as an RFC but sent it out with the
next-queue tag as I had gotten a bit distracted.

I shouldn't need to resubmit these until the other patches are
accepted so I will probably follow that route.

Thanks.

- Alex