From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] vxlan: GRO support at tunnel layer Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2015 08:45:57 -0700 Message-ID: <55916835.8030809@hp.com> References: <1435360189-641007-1-git-send-email-tom@herbertland.com> <558DF24A.1040504@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Tom Herbert , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Ramu Ramamurthy Return-path: Received: from g2t2353.austin.hp.com ([15.217.128.52]:21428 "EHLO g2t2353.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753270AbbF2Pp7 (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jun 2015 11:45:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/28/2015 10:20 AM, Ramu Ramamurthy wrote: > Rick, in your test, are you seeing gro becoming effective on the > vxlan interface with the 82599ES nic ? (ie, tcpdump on the vxlan > interface shows larger frames than the mtu of that interface, and > kernel trace shows vxlan_gro_receive() being hit) > > Throughputs of 5.5 Gbps (or the improved 7Gbs) leads me to suspect > that gro is still not effective in your test on the vxlan interface > with the 82588ES nic - Because, when vxlan gro became effective with > the patch I suggested earlier, I could see throughput of ~8.5 Gbps on > that nic. For the 5.X gbit/s test, where I am not getting GRO, I am seeing 1398 byte data packets when I trace vxlan0. For the other direction, at 7ish Gbit/s I am seeing 64XXX byte packets on vxlan0, with the occasional 25XXX byte packet. If I disable gro on that receiving vxlan0 interface, the throughput is more like 4.X Gbit/s happy benchmarking, rick