> On May 28, 2015 at 11:14 AM Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, 2015-05-28 at 10:38 -0400, jsulli...@opensourcedevel.com wrote: > <snip> > IFB has still a long way before being efficient. > > In the mean time, you could play with following patch, and > setup /sys/class/net/eth0/gro_timeout to 20000 > > This way, the GRO aggregation will work even at 1Gbps, and your IFB will > get big GRO packets instead of single MSS segments. > > Both IFB but also IP/TCP stack will have less work to do, > and receiver will send fewer ACK packets as well. > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c > index > f287186192bb655ba2dc1a205fb251351d593e98..c37f6657c047d3eb9bd72b647572edd53b1881ac > 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/igb/igb_main.c > @@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ static void igb_setup_dca(struct igb_adapter *); > #endif /* CONFIG_IGB_DCA */ <snip>
Interesting but this is destined to become a critical production system for a high profile, internationally recognized product so I am hesitant to patch. I doubt I can convince my company to do it but is improving IFB the sort of development effort that could be sponsored and then executed in a moderately short period of time? Thanks - John -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
