On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 07:16:14PM -0400, David Miller wrote: > From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leit...@gmail.com> > Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 18:33:31 -0300 > > > This patchset adds sctp GSO support. > > > > Performance tests indicates that increases throughput by 10% if using > > bigger chunk sizes, specially if bigger than MTU. For small chunks, it > > doesn't help much if not using heavy firewall rules. > > > > For small chunks it will probably be of more use once we get something > > like MSG_MORE as David Laight had suggested. > > > > I believe I could address all comments from the RFC attempt. > > Are these packets idempotent? > > Ie. if we GRO a bunch of SCTP frames on receive and that GRO frame is > forwarded rather than received locally, is the same exact packet > stream emitted on transmit?
Forward path is not going to happen because we can't do GRO for SCTP, unfortunatelly. We would have to somehow maintain frame boundaries (as I did for GSO here) (so that AUTH chunks have a delimited scope, for example) and that's not feasible with the current way we do GRO. Well, at least I couldn't see how. So this is just for pure tx path, no forwarding involved. Marcelo
