[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131107055633.GA28986@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 07:56:33 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>,
Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
christoph.paasch@...ouvain.be, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
hkchu@...gle.com, mwdalton@...gle.com,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: gso: Attempt to handle mega-GRO packets
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 06:02:38PM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-11-07 at 09:47 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
>
> > Say the system is fragmented sufficiently that you'll end up with
> > 0-order pages. In that case you'll only ever be able to coalesce
> > two packets.
>
> 4K page will contain 2 frags and they will coalesce.
>
> Performance will still be quite good.
>
> We probably add a tweak, to not have any hole in this case.
>
> >
> > Real systems that run for more than a day do end up with seriously
> > fragmented memory.
>
> Sure, but having shallow skbs in the first place help quite a bit.
>
> There is no perfect solution, unless of course you change virtio_net to
> provide different queues, with different frag sizes.
>
> Sort of what NIU driver uses.
>
I considered doing this but won't this mean packets can get reordered?
In practice we need to maintain ordering of RX frames within
a given flow, correct?
--
MST
--
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