[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4ABD3BEC.8040006@candelatech.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:53:48 -0700
From: Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC: shemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Why is LRO off by default on ixgbe?
On 09/25/2009 02:43 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 02:37:27PM -0700, Herbert Xu wrote:
>>
>>> Ok. It seems GRO was enabled the whole time, but LRO is what gave me the
>>> extra performance boost.
>>>
>>> In this particular case, I'm not actually routing, though I do have ip-forward
>>> enabled, so I guess LRO will be OK as long as I'm careful...
>>
>> What? A driver is either GRO or LRO, it can't be both. What
>> kernel version was this?
>
> Oh perhaps you mean LRO performed by hardware? That would make
> sense indeed. It's also one of the reasons why we hope the hardware
> folks would switch over to GRO so we can enable it for everyone :)
I assume it's in hardware. I am using ixgbe driver, 82599 chipset,
2.6.31 kernel.
GRO was showing as enabled the whole time in ethtool. Turning on LRO gave me an extra
6Gbps (from 12Gbps -> 18Gbps) receive throughput, so it certainly had some affect!
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists