> On Thu, 3 Sep 2026 17:45:50 +0200 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> > > Lacking more details from the vendor, I think you need to use a
> > > pktdrill-like sender, explicitly sets the segment lengths to some not
> > > mergeable (like, i.e. 200-300-400) but otherwise fitting a GRO packet
> > > (i.e. same hdr except for the sequence number and push flag allowed only
> > > in the last packet), ensure that the aggregation timeout lasts long
> > > enough to receive all of them, and check if the engine really aggregates
> > > them or not.  
> > 
> > I think in the example you pointed out (length 200,300,400) the hw engine will
> > create a single TCP packet composed by 3 segments (with gso_size = 300) while
> > sw GRO will just push sigle skbs. I agree this is just a GRO approximation.
> > If it is not enough I am fine to switch back to LRO implementation.
> 
> FWIW the gro.py test covers that and many more cases..

ack, thx for the pointer.
I run data_sml_lrg test available in gro.py and I can confirm the
hw aggregates the transmitted packets (even if it is not supposed
to do it). I will switch back to LRO in v6.

Regards,
Lorenzo