On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 02:37:48PM -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:56:46 -0800 > > > Switching TCP to GSO mode, relying on core networking layers > > to perform eventual adaptation for dumb devices was overdue. > > > > 1) Most TCP developments are done with TSO in mind. > > 2) Less high-resolution timers needs to be armed for TCP-pacing > > 3) GSO can benefit of xmit_more hint > > 4) Receiver GRO is more effective (as if TSO was used for real on sender) > > -> less ACK packets and overhead. > > 5) Write queues have less overhead (one skb holds about 64KB of payload) > > 6) SACK coalescing just works. (no payload in skb->head) > > 7) rtx rb-tree contains less packets, SACK is cheaper. > > 8) Removal of legacy code. Less maintenance hassles. > > > > Note that I have left the sendpage/zerocopy paths, but they probably can > > benefit from the same strategy. > > > > Thanks to Oleksandr Natalenko for reporting a performance issue for BBR/fq_codel, > > which was the main reason I worked on this patch series. > > Series applied, thanks Eric. > > SCTP might want to do something similar, and if so we can get rid > of sk_can_gso() too. Cc'ing linux-sctp and adding to the ToDo here, although it may be too soon for SCTP. GSO support was added just a few months ago and considering that it is not that much widely used as TCP, I fear we may have some issues that didn't show up yet. Marcelo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
