From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Greear Subject: Re: Getting physical packet counts with LRO enabled with ixgbe? Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:12:45 -0700 Message-ID: <4ABD405D.2030106@candelatech.com> References: <20090925214505.GA3472@gondor.apana.org.au> <4ABD3B34.8010903@candelatech.com> <20090925.145915.68839478.davem@davemloft.net> <20090925220115.GA3684@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Herbert Xu Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:59445 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751718AbZIYWOq (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Sep 2009 18:14:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090925220115.GA3684@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/25/2009 03:01 PM, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 02:59:15PM -0700, David Miller wrote: >> From: Ben Greear >> Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2009 14:50:44 -0700 >> >>> I get aggregate 18Gbps with LRO v/s 12Gbps without, so it's very >>> much a useful feature for me. >> >> And it'll stay like that until you work with Herbert to fix >> that performance difference. > > Actually I believe he's talking about hardware LRO which is a > different beast. > > AFAICS the ixgbe driver doesn't use software LRO anymore. > > So if it is hardware LRO then what we need is for the hardware > to switch over :) Either way, I will be happy to test & benchmark patches of this nature if someone wants to post them. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com