[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEP_g=-JAYHXM86AYNp7BhDV+eqfkKVgC+SJS1MVdo0K8fRLSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 10:52:12 -0700
From: Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] ipv4: gre: add GRO capability
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 5:48 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>
> Add GRO capability to IPv4 GRE tunnels, using the gro_cells
> infrastructure.
>
> Tested using IPv4 and IPv6 TCP traffic inside this tunnel, and
> checking GRO is building large packets.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
When I was thinking about doing this, my original plan was to handle
GRO/GSO by extending the current handlers to be able to look inside
GRE and then loop around to process the inner packet (similar to what
is done today with skb_flow_dissect() for RPS). Is there a reason to
do it in the device?
Pushing it earlier/later in the stack obviously increases the benefit
and it will also be more compatible with the forthcoming OVS tunneling
hooks, which will be flow based and therefore won't have a device.
Also, the next generation of NICs will support this type of thing in
hardware so putting the software versions very close to the NIC will
give us a more similar abstraction.
--
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