Andrew Gallatin wrote:
quoted text
> David Miller wrote:
>> From: Brice Goglin <brice@myri.com>
>>> Is there a good summary somewhere of why GRO is better,
>>
>> Transparent forwarding/bridging support, easier driver port.
>>
>>> and how to
>>> actually convert drivers?
>>
>> Step 1: Remove all of your LRO support code, every last line
>> Step 2: netif_receive_skb() --> napi_gro_receive()
>>         vlan_hwaccel_rx() --> vlan_gro_receive()
>>
>> It couldn't be any easier.
>>
>> And it would also behoove you to look at the commits that converted or
>> added GRO support to other drivers.  That's how I learned it :-)
> 
> Unfortunately, it doesn't appear that GRO is able to handle frags
> (like lro_receive_frags()), so I anticipate its overhead would

Ah, I missed napi_gro_frags()!   I've got quick and dirty test
patch which uses that, but I need to fix a few things. I also need
to figure out why it seems to be a bit slower than LRO
(varies from 8.5 to 9.2 Gb/s, rather than always 9.4Gb/s)
on my old, weak 2.0GHz athlon64.

Thanks for the pointer,

Drew
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html