On 01/20/16 at 04:34pm, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 16:19 -0800, Jesse Gross wrote: > > > I have a patch that implements the comparison between dsts. For > > packets without a dst, there isn't really a cost and if we do have a > > dst then GRO is still a benefit. So it seems like it is worth doing, > > even if it is more expensive than is ideal. > > You guys really want to kill GRO performance. > > Really the aggregation should happen at the first layer (ethernet > device), instead of doing it after tunnel decap. > > This is already done for GRE, IPIP, SIT, ... > > GRO having to access metadata looks wrong, if you think about trying to > do the same function in hardware (offload)
If I understand Jesse correctly then the added cost is only for metadata enabled packets. Though I agree, what's the benefit of doing GRO after decap? It seems like it's way too late and we've already paid the cost by going through the stack for each outer header packet.
