On 11/14/2018 10:07 AM, Edward Cree wrote: > > Conclusion: > * TCP b/w is 16.5% faster for traffic which cannot be coalesced by GRO. > But only for traffic that actually was perfect GRO candidate, right ? Now what happens if all the packets you are batching are hitting different TCP sockets ? (DDOS attack patterns) By the time we build a list of 64 packets, the first packets in the list wont be anymore in L1 cache (32 KB 8-way associative typically), and we will probably have cache trashing.
- [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: batched receive in GRO path Edward Cree
- [PATCH v3 net-next 1/4] net: introduce list entry point ... Edward Cree
- [PATCH v3 net-next 2/4] sfc: use batched receive for GRO Edward Cree
- [PATCH v3 net-next 4/4] net/core: handle GRO_NORMAL skbs... Edward Cree
- [PATCH v3 net-next 3/4] net: make listified RX functions... Edward Cree
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: batched receive in GRO ... Eric Dumazet
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: batched receive in ... Edward Cree
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: batched receive... Eric Dumazet
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: batched rec... Edward Cree
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: batche... Eric Dumazet
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: ba... Edward Cree
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net... Eric Dumazet
- Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: batched receive in GRO ... Edward Cree