From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 00/11] udp gso
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:24:07 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <20180418.132407.1643650484665622484.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20180417200059.30154-1-willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
        <1524050274.2599.21.camel@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        willemb@google.com
To: pabeni@redhat.com
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:45714 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1750872AbeDRRYL (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:24:11 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1524050274.2599.21.camel@redhat.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:17:54 +0200

> When testing with Spectre/Meltdown mitigation in places, I expect
> that the most relevant part of the gain is due to the single syscall
> per burst.

I was going to say exactly this.

Batching schemes that were borderline beneficial before spectre/meltdown
are more worthwhile now.