[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140321132820.GM22728@two.firstfloor.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:28:20 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
"H.K. Jerry Chu" <hkchu@...gle.com>,
Michael Dalton <mwdalton@...gle.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] csum experts, csum_replace2() is too expensive
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 05:50:50AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 18:56 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> writes:
> > >
> > > I saw csum_partial() consuming 1% of cpu cycles in a GRO workload, that
> > > is insane...
> >
> >
> > Couldn't it just be the cache miss?
>
> Or the fact that we mix 16 bit stores and 32bit loads ?
It should cause a small stall from not doing load-store
forwarding, but 1% of a serious workload would be surprising.
Are you sure it's not some skid effect?
-Andi
--
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