From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Richard Gobert <richardbgobert@gmail.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org,
willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 4/4] net: gro: move L3 flush checks to tcp_gro_receive
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 17:14:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d60c6185b8394da02479100981fa3f1306d9c81f.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6566fd5f-fcdf-4dc7-b8a2-5e8a182f8c49@gmail.com>
Hi,
On Tue, 2024-03-26 at 16:02 +0100, Richard Gobert wrote:
> This patch is meaningful by itself - removing checks against non-relevant
> packets and making the flush/flush_id checks in a single place.
I'm personally not sure this patch is a win. The code churn is
significant. I understand this is for performance's sake, but I don't
see the benefit???
The changelog shows that perf reports slightly lower figures for
inet_gro_receive(). That is expected, as this patch move code out of
such functio. What about inet_gro_flush()/tcp_gro_receive() where such
code is moved?
Additionally the reported deltas is within noise level according to my
personal experience with similar tests.
I think we are better off without this patch.
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-26 16:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-25 18:25 [PATCH net-next v4 0/4] net: gro: encapsulation bug fix and flush checks improvements Richard Gobert
2024-03-25 18:25 ` [PATCH net-next v4 1/4] net: gro: add p_off param in *_gro_complete Richard Gobert
2024-03-25 18:25 ` [PATCH net-next v4 2/4] selftests/net: add local address bind in vxlan selftest Richard Gobert
2024-03-25 18:25 ` [PATCH net-next v4 3/4] net: gro: add {inner_}network_offset to napi_gro_cb Richard Gobert
2024-03-25 18:25 ` [PATCH net-next v4 4/4] net: gro: move L3 flush checks to tcp_gro_receive Richard Gobert
2024-03-25 18:53 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-03-26 12:35 ` Richard Gobert
2024-03-26 13:40 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-03-26 14:09 ` Richard Gobert
2024-03-26 2:33 ` Jakub Kicinski
2024-03-26 14:14 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-03-26 14:43 ` Richard Gobert
2024-03-26 14:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-03-26 15:02 ` Richard Gobert
2024-03-26 15:10 ` Willem de Bruijn
2024-03-26 15:26 ` Richard Gobert
2024-03-26 16:14 ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2024-03-26 17:25 ` Richard Gobert
2024-03-26 18:29 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-03-27 16:07 ` Richard Gobert
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=d60c6185b8394da02479100981fa3f1306d9c81f.camel@redhat.com \
--to=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richardbgobert@gmail.com \
--cc=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.