[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ3xEMjucmc-6k=kvEp99uZbCA50tUwPMK1z__wAG+ah7qNzsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 15:37:47 +0300
From: Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Cc: Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 0/5] Support fraglist GRO/GSO
On Wed, Sep 18, 2019 at 2:48 PM Steffen Klassert
<steffen.klassert@...unet.com> wrote:
> This patchset adds support to do GRO/GSO by chaining packets
> of the same flow at the SKB frag_list pointer. This avoids
> the overhead to merge payloads into one big packet, and
> on the other end, if GSO is needed it avoids the overhead
> of splitting the big packet back to the native form.
>
> Patch 1 Enables UDP GRO by default.
>
> Patch 2 adds a netdev feature flag to enable listifyed GRO,
> this implements one of the configuration options discussed
> at netconf 2019.
[..]
The slide say that linked packets travel together though the stack.
This sounds somehow similar to the approach suggested by Ed
for skb lists. I wonder what we can say on cases where each of the
approaches would function better.
Or.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists