From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
To: "Holger Hoffstätte" <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>,
"Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
"Juliana Rodrigueiro" <juliana.rodrigueiro@intra2net.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: r8169: Performance regression and latency instability
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2019 21:12:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8fa71d82-d309-df38-5924-2275db188b61@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <792d3a56-32aa-afee-f2b4-1f867b9cf75f@applied-asynchrony.com>
On 16.08.2019 15:59, Holger Hoffstätte wrote:
> On 8/16/19 2:35 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> ..snip..
>> I also see this relevant commit : I have no idea why SG would have any relation with TSO.
>>
>> commit a7eb6a4f2560d5ae64bfac98d79d11378ca2de6c
>> Author: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
>> Date: Fri Aug 9 00:02:40 2019 +0200
>>
>> r8169: fix performance issue on RTL8168evl
>> Disabling TSO but leaving SG active results is a significant
>> performance drop. Therefore disable also SG on RTL8168evl.
>> This restores the original performance.
>> Fixes: 93681cd7d94f ("r8169: enable HW csum and TSO")
>> Signed-off-by: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
>
> It does not - and admittedly none of this makes sense, but stay with me here.
>
> The commit 93681cd7d94f to net-next enabled rx/tx HW checksumming and TSO
> by default, but disabled TSO for one specific chip revision - the most popular
> one, of course. Enabling rx/tx checksums by default while leaving SG on turned
> out to be the performance issue (~780 MBit max) that I found & fixed in the
> quoted commit. SG *can* be enabled when rx/tx checkusmming is *dis*abled
> (I just verified again), we just had to sanitize the new default.
>
> An alternative strategy could still be to (again?) disable everything by default
> and just let people manually enable whatever settings work for their random
> chip revision + BIOS combination. I'll let Heiner chime in here.
>
> Basically these chips are dumpster fires and should not be used for anything
> ever, which of course means they are everywhere.
>
> AFAICT none of this has anything to do with Juliana's problem..
>
Indeed, here we're talking about changes in linux-next, and Juliana's issue is
with 4.19. However I'd appreciate if Juliana could test with linux-next and
different combinations of the NETIF_F_xxx features.
I have no immediate idea why the referenced GSO change affects r8169 but not
other chips / drivers.
> -h
>
Heiner
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-16 19:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-16 12:09 r8169: Performance regression and latency instability Juliana Rodrigueiro
2019-08-16 12:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2019-08-16 13:59 ` Holger Hoffstätte
2019-08-16 19:12 ` Heiner Kallweit [this message]
2019-08-19 16:04 ` Juliana Rodrigueiro
2019-09-06 11:25 ` Juliana Rodrigueiro
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=8fa71d82-d309-df38-5924-2275db188b61@gmail.com \
--to=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=holger@applied-asynchrony.com \
--cc=juliana.rodrigueiro@intra2net.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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