netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: ecree@solarflare.com
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] sfc: enable 4-tuple UDP RSS hashing
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 13:59:36 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161109.135936.1665492542584983522.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2932a4dc-cee0-47d1-d4a9-2b293e6155ad@solarflare.com>

From: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 18:51:15 +0000

> On 09/11/16 18:09, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
>> Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 13:02:05 +0000
>>
>>> On 07/11/16 18:20, David Miller wrote:
>>>> From: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
>>>> Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 22:10:31 +0000
>>>>
>>>>> EF10 based NICs have configurable RSS hash fields, and can be made to take the
>>>>> ports into the hash on UDP (they already do so for TCP).  This patch series
>>>>> enables this, in order to improve spreading of UDP traffic.
>>>> What does the chip do with fragmented traffic?
>>> Only the first fragment will be considered UDP, it will treat the rest as "other
>>> IP" and 2-tuple hash them, probably hitting a different queue.
>>>
>>> My understanding is that while that will reduce performance, that shouldn't be a
>>> problem as performance-sensitive users will avoid fragmentation anyway.
>>> It could also lead to out-of-order packet delivery, but it's UDP so that's
>>> supposed to be OK.
>> Our software hashing never tries to inspect the ports for fragmented
>> frames.  And I'm pretty sure this is intentional.
>>
>> We should minimize the difference between what we do in software, which
>> we fully control, and what we ask the hardware to offload for us.
>>
>> If you can't configure the chip to skip the ports for fragmented frames
>> than I'm going to ask you to drop this.
> I just checked and it turns out I was mistaken, we don't treat the first fragment
> differently after all, we skip the ports for all fragments including the first.
> Sorry for the misinformation.

That's more in line with what is expected, series applied, thanks.

      reply	other threads:[~2016-11-09 18:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-03 22:10 [PATCH net-next 0/2] sfc: enable 4-tuple UDP RSS hashing Edward Cree
2016-11-03 22:12 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] sfc: enable 4-tuple RSS hashing for UDP Edward Cree
2016-11-03 22:12 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] sfc: report 4-tuple UDP hashing to ethtool, if it's enabled Edward Cree
2016-11-07 18:20 ` [PATCH net-next 0/2] sfc: enable 4-tuple UDP RSS hashing David Miller
2016-11-08 13:02   ` Edward Cree
2016-11-09 18:09     ` David Miller
2016-11-09 18:51       ` Edward Cree
2016-11-09 18:59         ` David Miller [this message]

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=20161109.135936.1665492542584983522.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ecree@solarflare.com \
    --cc=linux-net-drivers@solarflare.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).