From: Edward Cree
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 18:23:42 +
> I'm doing a patch to update sfc to use this new helper. Is this 'net'
> material, or should I wait for 'net-next' to open back up?
As the driver maintainer I guess I can lead that judgment up to you
at least to a certain extent.
On 03/11/18 22:40, David Miller wrote:
> Series applied, but I wonder how many other commonly used drivers we
> should update the same way mlx4 is here?
Hi David,
I'm doing a patch to update sfc to use this new helper. Is this 'net'
material, or should I wait for 'net-next' to open back up?
-E
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Sat, 3 Nov 2018 16:00:39 -0700
> On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 3:40 PM David Miller wrote:
>
>> Series applied, but I wonder how many other commonly used drivers we
>> should update the same way mlx4 is here?
>
> I can provide patches but can not test them, so probably we sho
On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 3:40 PM David Miller wrote:
> Series applied, but I wonder how many other commonly used drivers we
> should update the same way mlx4 is here?
I can provide patches but can not test them, so probably we should get
Tested-by tags before applying them.
Thanks.
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:39:11 -0700
> While BQL bulk dequeue works well for TSO packets, it is
> not very efficient as soon as GSO is involved.
>
> On a GSO only workload (UDP or TCP), this patch series
> can save about 8 % of cpu cycles on a 40Gbit mlx4 NIC,
> by keeping op
While BQL bulk dequeue works well for TSO packets, it is
not very efficient as soon as GSO is involved.
On a GSO only workload (UDP or TCP), this patch series
can save about 8 % of cpu cycles on a 40Gbit mlx4 NIC,
by keeping optimal batching, and avoiding expensive
doorbells, qdisc requeues and re
