netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: introduce netdevice gso_min

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 06 Oct 2014 17:54:10 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	amirv@...lanox.com, edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	yevgenyp@...lanox.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com, idos@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: introduce netdevice gso_min_segs
 attribute

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:42:58 -0700

> On Mon, 2014-10-06 at 17:21 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> 
>> So exactly what value are you using for mlx4?
>> 
> 
> It seems that on ConnectX-3 family, TSO packets of 2 or 3 MSS are not
> worth using TSO engine. The cutoff point seems to be 4 (same throughput)
> 
> So I was planning to use gso_min_segs = 4 only for them.
> 
>> Because I wonder if we should just generically forfeit TSO unless
>> we have > 2 segments, for example.
> 
> When I tested on bnx2x, this was not a gain.
> 
> bnx2x is faster sending TSO packets, even if they have 2 MSS.
> 
> I'll try the experiment on I40E Intel cards.

Ok I'm sold on your patch then if two major chipsets already benefit
from differing values.

I'll apply this, thanks Eric.
--
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