[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iJejn+MEBqrXDKxgwPZydU7mMrk2HYZqN+CF9Npyjx7pA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 08:09:31 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: gro: inline tcp_gro_pull_header()
On Fri, Nov 14, 2025 at 7:56 AM Alexander Lobakin
<aleksander.lobakin@...el.com> wrote:
>
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 14:03:57 +0000
>
> > tcp_gro_pull_header() is used in GRO fast path, inline it.
>
> Looks reasonable, but... any perf numbers? bloat-o-meter stats?
This is used two times, one from IPv4, one from IPv6.
FDO usually embeds this function in the two callers, this patch
reduces the gap between FDO and non FDO kernels.
Non FDO builds get a ~0.5 % performance increase with this patch, for
a cost of less than 192 bytes on x86_64.
It might sound small, but adding all these changes together is not small.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists