[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1347947120.26523.207.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 07:45:20 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
tushar.n.dave@...el.com, john.r.fastabend@...el.com,
mirqus@...il.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, gospo@...hat.com, sassmann@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [net] e1000: Small packets may get corrupted during padding by
HW
On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 20:27 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> It also just occurred to me that there might be some benefit in cache
> aligning the max header size. It seems like doing something like that
> should reduce the overall memory footprint and would probably improve
> performance.
Given that most ACK packets are 66 bytes (14 ethernet + 20 IP + 32 TCP),
I am not sure we need to make any tweak on alignment ?
--
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