All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@mellanox.co.il>
Cc: Steven Whitehouse <steve@chygwyn.com>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	openib-general@openib.org, rolandd@cisco.com
Subject: Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:29:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061011142957.5bd42784@freekitty> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20061011212339.GH15468@mellanox.co.il>

O
> > 
> > You might want to try ignoring the check in dev.c and testing
> > to see if there is a performance gain.  It wouldn't be hard to test
> > a modified version and validate the performance change.
> 
> Yes. With my patch, there is a huge performance gain by increasing MTU to 64K.
> And it seems the only way to do this is by S/G.
> 
> > You could even do what I suggested and use skb_checksum_help()
> > to do inplace checksumming, as a performance test.
> 
> I can. But as network algorithmics says (chapter 5)
> "Since such bus reads are expensive, the CPU might as well piggyback
> the checksum computation with the copy process".
> 
> It speaks about onboard the adapter buffers, but memory bus reads are also much slower
> than CPU nowdays.  So I think even if this works well in benchmark in real life
> single copy should better.
> 

The other alternative might be to make copy/checksum code smarter about using
fragments rather than allocating a large buffer. It should avoid second order
allocations (effective size > PAGESIZE).

-- 
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@osdl.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2006-10-11 21:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-10-09 17:47 Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-09 16:50 ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-10-09 16:50   ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-10-10 14:43   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-10 17:43     ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-10-11  0:13       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11  0:15         ` Roland Dreier
2006-10-11  0:26           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11  3:33             ` Roland Dreier
2006-10-11  3:36               ` David Miller
2006-10-11  3:42                 ` Roland Dreier
2006-10-11  3:45                   ` David Miller
2006-10-11  3:49                     ` Roland Dreier
2006-10-11  3:50                       ` David Miller
2006-10-11  2:15         ` David Miller
2006-10-11  9:05           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11  9:05             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11  9:09             ` Steven Whitehouse
2006-10-11 15:01               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 20:11                 ` Steven Whitehouse
2006-10-11 20:52                   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 20:57                   ` Stephen Hemminger
2006-10-11 21:23                     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 21:23                       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 21:29                       ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2006-10-11 21:42                         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 21:41                       ` David Miller
2006-10-12 19:12                         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-12 19:12                           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-13  4:22                           ` David Miller
2006-10-13  6:17                             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 20:52                 ` David Miller
2006-10-11 20:52                   ` David Miller
2006-10-11 21:11                   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 21:11                     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11  9:20             ` David Miller
2006-10-11  9:46               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2006-10-11 18:21                 ` [openib-general] " Michael Krause
2006-10-11 13:11               ` [RFC] Question about potential problem in net/ipv4/route.c Eric Dumazet
2006-10-12  5:05                 ` David Miller
2006-10-12  5:31                   ` Patrick McHardy
2006-10-12  5:54                     ` David Miller
2006-10-12  5:48                   ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-12  6:02                     ` David Miller
2006-10-12  6:10                       ` Patrick McHardy
2006-10-12  6:25                         ` David Miller
2006-10-12  6:35                       ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-12  7:48                         ` David Miller
2006-10-16  9:00                 ` [PATCH] NET : Suspicious locking in reqsk_queue_hash_req() Eric Dumazet
2006-10-16  9:07                   ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-16 16:16                     ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2006-10-16 16:56                       ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-16 17:39                         ` Eric Dumazet
2006-10-16 20:41                   ` David Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20061011142957.5bd42784@freekitty \
    --to=shemminger@osdl.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@mellanox.co.il \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=openib-general@openib.org \
    --cc=rolandd@cisco.com \
    --cc=steve@chygwyn.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.