| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <36F7E4A28C18BE4DB7C86058E7B607241E622083@MTRDAG01.mtl.com> Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 19:24:26 +0000 From: Shlomo Pongratz <shlomop@...lanox.com> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: RE: GRO aggregation From: Eric Dumazet [eric.dumazet@...il.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 10:02 PM To: Shlomo Pongratz Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: RE: GRO aggregation On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 18:49 +0000, Shlomo Pongratz wrote: > I disabled the LRO. I actually tried the all the 4 options and found that LRO, GRO, LRO+GRO gives the same results for ixgbe w.r.t aggregation size (didn't check for throughput or latency). > Is there a timeout that flushes the aggregated SKBs before 64K were aggregated? At the end of NAPI run, we flush the gro state. It basically means that an interrupt came, and we fetched 21 frames from the NIC. To get more packets per interrupt, you might try to slow down your cpu ;) But I dont get the point. I see that in ixgbe the weight for the NAPI is 64 (netif_napi_add). So if packets are arriving in high rate then an the CPU is fast enough to collect the packets as they arrive, assuming packets continue to arrives while the NAPI runs. Then it should have aggregate more. So we will have less passes trough the stack. Shlomo-- 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