Re: [PATCH v2 net-next RFC] Generic XDP

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 2:30 PM, Andy Gospodarek <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 03:28:54PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Andy Gospodarek <andy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2017 14:39:35 -0400
>>
>> > As promised, I did some testing today with bnxt_en's implementation
>> > of XDP and this one.
>>
>> Thanks a lot Andy, obviously the patch needs some more work.
>>
>> I noticed GRO stuff in your profile, and Alexei mentioned this earlier
>> today.  We probably should elide GRO if generic XDP is attached, since
>> in particular this makes the skb_linearize() really expensive.
>
> Good catch -- I actually thought we were disabling GRO automatically and it
> looks like we are not.  :-/  I'll send Michael a patch.

Andy,  I think we only need to disable GRO if we are doing generic
XDP.  Optimized XDP can still use GRO for the XDP_PASS case.

>
> Disabling GRO allows me to process an additional 1Mpps, so I'm up to 7.5Mpps
> with this patch.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Fedora Linux Users]     [Linux SCTP]     [DCCP]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite Campsites]

  Powered by Linux