From: David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] net: add TCP fraglist GRO support
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 09:03:20 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7537ed21-4fc5-47c1-9c06-58982a308419@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89i+6xRe4V6aDmD-9EM0uD7A87f6rzg3S7Xq6-NaB_Mb4nw@mail.gmail.com>
On 4/23/24 4:15 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> I think we should push hard to not use frag_list in drivers :/
why is that? I noticed significant gains for local delivery after adding
frag_list support for H/W GRO. Fewer skbs going up the stack is
essential for high throughput and reducing CPU load.
>
> And GRO itself could avoid building frag_list skbs
> in hosts where forwarding is enabled.
But if the egress device supports SG and the driver understands
frag_list, walking the frag_list should be cheaper than multiple skbs
traversing the forwarding path.
>
> (Note that we also can increase MAX_SKB_FRAGS to 45 these days)
Using 45 frags has other side effects and not something that can be done
universally (hence why it is a config option).
45 frags is for Big TCP at 4kB and that is ~ 3 skbs at the default
setting of 17 which means an skb chain 2 deep. 1 skb going up the stack
vs 3 skbs - that is a big difference.
Was there a conference talk or a discussion around tests performed
comparing use of frag_list with MAX_SKB_FRAGS at 17 vs expanding
MAX_SKB_FRAGS to 45?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-23 15:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-23 9:41 [RFC] net: add TCP fraglist GRO support Felix Fietkau
2024-04-23 10:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-04-23 10:25 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-04-23 11:17 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-04-23 11:55 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-04-23 12:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-04-23 12:23 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-04-23 13:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-04-23 14:34 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-23 16:55 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-04-24 1:24 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-24 13:50 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-04-24 14:30 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-04-24 16:26 ` Felix Fietkau
2024-04-23 15:03 ` David Ahern [this message]
2024-04-23 15:18 ` Eric Dumazet
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=7537ed21-4fc5-47c1-9c06-58982a308419@kernel.org \
--to=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nbd@nbd.name \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
/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