[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190405105151.7csiro6ib5zpaqsd@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 12:51:51 +0200
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
Cc: Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@....ntt.co.jp>,
Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>,
Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
Toshiaki Makita <toshiaki.makita1@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@...hat.com>,
Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Jo-Philipp Wich <jo@...n.io>,
Koen Vandeputte <koen.vandeputte@...ntric.com>
Subject: Re: NAT performance regression caused by vlan GRO support
Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com> wrote:
> As a first approximation, maybe just:
>
> if (!has_hardware_cksum_offload(netdev) && link_rate(netdev) <= 1Gbps)
> disable_gro();
I don't think its a good idea. For local delivery case, there is no
way to avoid the checksum cost, so might as well have GRO enabled.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists