[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55916835.8030809@hp.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 08:45:57 -0700
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Ramu Ramamurthy <sramamur@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC: Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] vxlan: GRO support at tunnel layer
On 06/28/2015 10:20 AM, Ramu Ramamurthy wrote:
> Rick, in your test, are you seeing gro becoming effective on the
> vxlan interface with the 82599ES nic ? (ie, tcpdump on the vxlan
> interface shows larger frames than the mtu of that interface, and
> kernel trace shows vxlan_gro_receive() being hit)
>
> Throughputs of 5.5 Gbps (or the improved 7Gbs) leads me to suspect
> that gro is still not effective in your test on the vxlan interface
> with the 82588ES nic - Because, when vxlan gro became effective with
> the patch I suggested earlier, I could see throughput of ~8.5 Gbps on
> that nic.
For the 5.X gbit/s test, where I am not getting GRO, I am seeing 1398
byte data packets when I trace vxlan0.
For the other direction, at 7ish Gbit/s I am seeing 64XXX byte packets
on vxlan0, with the occasional 25XXX byte packet. If I disable gro on
that receiving vxlan0 interface, the throughput is more like 4.X Gbit/s
happy benchmarking,
rick
--
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