[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+ovDB+qLBV3DEx5eB4vDZq=X+rWUZgR7qHjDLc4=UN2w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 19:02:04 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Shradha Gupta <shradhagupta@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc: linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "K. Y. Srinivasan" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>, Wei Liu <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>, Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Long Li <longli@...rosoft.com>, Konstantin Taranov <kotaranov@...rosoft.com>,
Souradeep Chakrabarti <schakrabarti@...ux.microsoft.com>, Erick Archer <erick.archer@...look.com>,
Shradha Gupta <shradhagupta@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/2] net: mana: Allow tso_max_size to go up-to GSO_MAX_SIZE
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 6:59 PM Shradha Gupta
<shradhagupta@...ux.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 09:57:53AM -0800, Shradha Gupta wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 04:55:54PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 5:40???AM Shradha Gupta
> > > <shradhagupta@...ux.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Allow the max aggregated pkt size to go up-to GSO_MAX_SIZE for MANA NIC.
> > > > This patch only increases the max allowable gso/gro pkt size for MANA
> > > > devices and does not change the defaults.
> > > > Following are the perf benefits by increasing the pkt aggregate size from
> > > > legacy gso_max_size value(64K) to newer one(up-to 511K)
> > > >
> > > > for i in {1..10}; do netperf -t TCP_RR -H 10.0.0.5 -p50000 -- -r80000,80000
> > > > -O MIN_LATENCY,P90_LATENCY,P99_LATENCY,THROUGHPUT|tail -1; done
> > >
> > > Was this tested with IPv6 ?
> >
> > Hi Eric,
> > yes, sanity and functional testing where performed(manually) and passed on azure
> > VMs with IPv6.
> Forgot to mention that the tests were performed on both IPv4 and IPv6
> and these numbers are from IPv4 testing
Where is the IPv6 jumbo header removed ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists