From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] myr10ge: again fix lro_gen_skb() alignment Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20090415.164248.188350673.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20090415.030213.249634462.davem@davemloft.net> <49E5DABB.9070806@myri.com> <49E64BE4.1050908@myri.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: brice@myri.com, sgruszka@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au To: gallatin@myri.com Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:32879 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752460AbZDOXm5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:42:57 -0400 In-Reply-To: <49E64BE4.1050908@myri.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Andrew Gallatin Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:04:36 -0400 > Andrew Gallatin wrote: >> Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that GRO is able to handle frags >> (like lro_receive_frags()), so I anticipate its overhead would > > Ah, I missed napi_gro_frags()! I've got quick and dirty test > patch which uses that, but I need to fix a few things. I also need > to figure out why it seems to be a bit slower than LRO > (varies from 8.5 to 9.2 Gb/s, rather than always 9.4Gb/s) > on my old, weak 2.0GHz athlon64. Herbert has been working on various optimizations to get cxgb3 GRO performance on par with LRO. Perhaps he has some things for you to try :-)