From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolae Rosia Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: macb: replace literal constant with NET_IP_ALIGN Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 17:29:42 +0300 Message-ID: <5593F956.4020300@certsign.ro> References: <5592D105.7080006@certsign.ro> <1435748191.4110.127.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <5593EB38.5050000@certsign.ro> <1435758289.4110.130.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nicolas Ferre , To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mx2.uti.ro ([91.220.13.110]:54869 "EHLO mx2.uti.ro" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754450AbbGAOay (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2015 10:30:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1435758289.4110.130.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/01/2015 04:44 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > I really doubt this adapter can process millions of packets per second ? I was suggesting this since I was taking into consideration the comment from skbuff.c, "we can save several CPU cycles by avoiding having to disable and re-enable IRQs." Is there a downside to this? > > I would rather enable GRO, it would be more useful. I had no idea what GRO is, so I have read about it [0] and looked at a couple of drivers which use it. They all seem to replace netif_receive_skb with napi_gro_receive and when there are no more packets in napi_pool they call napi_gro_flush. Is it that simple? Regards [0] https://lwn.net/Articles/358910/