[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YzWcI+U1WYJuZIdk@lunn.ch>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 15:22:43 +0200
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@....com>
Cc: Joakim Zhang <qiangqing.zhang@....com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/1] net: fec: add initial XDP support
> I actually did some compare testing regarding the page pool for
> normal traffic. So far I don't see significant improvement in the
> current implementation. The performance for large packets improves a
> little, and the performance for small packets get a little worse.
What hardware was this for? imx51? imx6? imx7 Vybrid? These all use
the FEC.
By small packets, do you mean those under the copybreak limit?
Please provide some benchmark numbers with your next patchset.
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists