Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936012Ab3DKRb0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:31:26 -0400 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:36889 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935644Ab3DKRbY (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:31:24 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 13:31:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <20130411.133119.913809939413807690.davem@davemloft.net> To: sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com Cc: w@1wt.eu, andrew@lunn.ch, jason@lakedaemon.net, benh@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, florian@openwrt.org, smoch@web.de, paulus@samba.org, buytenh@wantstofly.org, dale@farnsworth.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: mv643xx_eth: Add GRO support From: David Miller In-Reply-To: References: <20130411150326.GA19978@1wt.eu> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [0.0.0.0]); Thu, 11 Apr 2013 10:31:22 -0700 (PDT) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1368 Lines: 29 From: Sebastian Hesselbarth Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 17:27:03 +0200 > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:47:49PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: >>> I tried todays net-next on top of 3.9-rc6 without any gro patch, with >>> the initial >>> patch (Soeren) and your proposed patch (Willy). The results show that >>> both patches >>> allow a significant increase in throughput compared to >>> netif_receive_skb (!gro, !lro) >>> alone. Having gro with lro disabled gives some 2% more throughput >>> compared to lro only. >> >> Indeed this is consistent with my memories, since Eric improved the >> GRO path, it became faster than LRO on this chip. > > I don't have a strong opinion on whether Soeren's or your proposal should > be submitted. But I insist on having one of them in, as GRO significantly > improves the common use case, is enabled by default, and not as > constrained as LRO. I think, as per other drivers, LRO should be eliminated completely from all drivers, including this one, and GRO used exclusively instead. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/