netdev - Re: GRO after RPS?

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: <m2q412e6f7f1004251840vdf264f38vd0df335802cb2a91@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 26 Apr 2010 09:40:35 +0800
From:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: GRO after RPS?

On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 9:17 AM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> The goal is to eliminate all packet header references from the pre-RPS
> path, and let the post-RPS cpu do it.

If the NIC doesn't provide rxhash, RPS will have to compute one by one
by itself. Is the hash computation more expensive than GRO? I think
the hash computation is cheaper than GRO, so we can do RPS ASAP to
avoid the direct CPU overload.

-- 
Regards，
Changli Gao(xiaosuo@...il.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