From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [net] e1000: Small packets may get corrupted during padding by HW Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 07:45:20 +0200 Message-ID: <1347947120.26523.207.camel@edumazet-glaptop> References: <50578DE4.7080806@intel.com> <1347915723.26523.179.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <5057E3F2.5090504@gmail.com> <20120917.230300.653531213751776624.davem@davemloft.net> <5057EA05.8020005@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , alexander.h.duyck@intel.com, tushar.n.dave@intel.com, john.r.fastabend@intel.com, mirqus@gmail.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, gospo@redhat.com, sassmann@redhat.com To: Alexander Duyck Return-path: Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:58497 "EHLO mail-wg0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754047Ab2IRFp0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:45:26 -0400 Received: by wgbdr13 with SMTP id dr13so6503500wgb.1 for ; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 22:45:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5057EA05.8020005@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2012-09-17 at 20:27 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > It also just occurred to me that there might be some benefit in cache > aligning the max header size. It seems like doing something like that > should reduce the overall memory footprint and would probably improve > performance. Given that most ACK packets are 66 bytes (14 ethernet + 20 IP + 32 TCP), I am not sure we need to make any tweak on alignment ?