On 04/11/2013 07:55 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 14:40 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
This patch adds GRO support to mv643xx_eth by making it invoke
napi_gro_receive instead of netif_receive_skb.
The inet_lro support should be removed at the same time; inet_lro is now
de
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:27:03PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> I don't have a strong opinion on whether Soeren's or your proposal should
>> be submitted. But I insist on having one of them in, as GRO significantly
>> improves the c
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:47:49PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> I tried todays net-next on top of 3.9-rc6 without any gro patch, with
>> the initial
>> patch (Soeren) and your proposed patch (Willy). The results show that
>> both pa
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:40:23PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> This patch adds GRO support to mv643xx_eth by making it invoke
>> napi_gro_receive instead of netif_receive_skb.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Soeren Moch
>> Signed-off-by: Seb
This patch adds GRO support to mv643xx_eth by making it invoke
napi_gro_receive instead of netif_receive_skb.
Signed-off-by: Soeren Moch
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth
---
Cc: "David S. Miller"
Cc: Lennert Buytenhek
Cc: Andrew Lunn
Cc: Jason Cooper
Cc: Florian Fainelli
Cc: Benjamin He
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:40:23 +0200
> This patch adds GRO support to mv643xx_eth by making it invoke
> napi_gro_receive instead of netif_receive_skb.
>
> Signed-off-by: Soeren Moch
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Applied.
__
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 10:59:15AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 19:51 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>
> > Eric provided me with one such experimental patch in the past for this
> > driver. It worked for me but we never tried to clean it up to propose
> > it for inclusion.
> >
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 14:40 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> This patch adds GRO support to mv643xx_eth by making it invoke
> napi_gro_receive instead of netif_receive_skb.
The inet_lro support should be removed at the same time; inet_lro is now
deprecated and there should be no need to keep
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 19:51 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Eric provided me with one such experimental patch in the past for this
> driver. It worked for me but we never tried to clean it up to propose
> it for inclusion.
>
> If anyone is interested, I might still have it in experimental shape.
W
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 01:31:19PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Sebastian Hesselbarth
> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 17:27:03 +0200
>
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> >> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:47:49PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> >>> I tried todays net-nex
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 13:31 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> I think, as per other drivers, LRO should be eliminated completely from
> all drivers, including this one, and GRO used exclusively instead.
This would be awesome.
AFAIK current LRO users are :
drivers/infiniband/hw/nes/nes_hw.c
drivers/n
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 17:27:03 +0200
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:47:49PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>>> I tried todays net-next on top of 3.9-rc6 without any gro patch, with
>>> the initial
>>> patch
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 06:59:11PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:27:03PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> >> I don't have a strong opinion on whether Soeren's or your proposal should
> >> be submitted
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 18:02 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> OK, that makes sense indeed, I didn't think about this case. All
> I remember was that the old call achieved a higher packet rate
> than napi_gro_receive, but it was on an older kernel and I can't
> be more specifics after several months :-
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 08:54:35AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 17:32 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:27:03PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> > > I don't have a strong opinion on whether Soeren's or your proposal should
> > > be submitted. But
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 14:40 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> This patch adds GRO support to mv643xx_eth by making it invoke
> napi_gro_receive instead of netif_receive_skb.
>
> Signed-off-by: Soeren Moch
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth
> ---
> Cc: "David S. Miller"
> Cc: Lennert Buy
On Thu, 2013-04-11 at 17:32 +0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:27:03PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> > I don't have a strong opinion on whether Soeren's or your proposal should
> > be submitted. But I insist on having one of them in, as GRO significantly
> > improves t
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 05:27:03PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> I don't have a strong opinion on whether Soeren's or your proposal should
> be submitted. But I insist on having one of them in, as GRO significantly
> improves the common use case, is enabled by default, and not as
> constrai
Hi Sebastian,
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 04:47:49PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> I did some simple tests on Dove/Cubox with 'netperf -cCD' and
> gso/gro/lro options on
> mv643xx_eth. The tests may not be sufficient, as I am not that into
> net performance testing.
In fact the difference onl
Hi,
On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:40:23PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> This patch adds GRO support to mv643xx_eth by making it invoke
> napi_gro_receive instead of netif_receive_skb.
>
> Signed-off-by: Soeren Moch
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Hesselbarth
> ---
> Cc: "David S. Miller"
> Cc:
20 matches
Mail list logo
