linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: mv643xx

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]

Message-ID: <20130411160258.GI1910@1wt.eu>
Date:	Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:02:58 +0200
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Florian Fainelli <florian@...nwrt.org>,
	Soeren Moch <smoch@....de>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>,
	Dale Farnsworth <dale@...nsworth.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: mv643xx_eth: Add GRO support

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:54:35AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 17:32 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:27:03PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> > > I don't have a strong opinion on whether Soeren's or your proposal should
> > > be submitted. But I insist on having one of them in, as GRO significantly
> > > improves the common use case, is enabled by default, and not as
> > > constrained as LRO.
> > 
> > I agree, use yours first, but we should keep an eye on this. Since you have
> > everything to run a test, please try to see if you can get netperf to run
> > over IPv6, I'm sure the NIC doesn't handle it.
> 
> Willy, testing the checksum in the NIC driver itself prevents the stack
> doing GRO even if the NIC could not checksum the packet, as in GRE
> tunneling for example.
> 
> So Sebastien patch is better IMHO : Just call the napi gro handler and
> let core stack handles the details ;)

OK, that makes sense indeed, I didn't think about this case. All
I remember was that the old call achieved a higher packet rate
than napi_gro_receive, but it was on an older kernel and I can't
be more specifics after several months :-/

Cheers,
Willy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/