Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2016 08:41:30 +0000 From: "sepherosa_gmail.com (Sepherosa Ziehau)" <phabric-noreply@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: [Differential] D6689: tcp/lro: Implement hash table for LRO entries. Message-ID: <f9ae9974d4f9264e193bb1c72f81b525@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-gqea3nyz45kho6yqfulz-req@FreeBSD.org> References: <differential-rev-PHID-DREV-gqea3nyz45kho6yqfulz-req@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
sepherosa_gmail.com added a comment. In https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6689#141127, @hselasky wrote: > > Well, as I said the VM does not have the luxury to do sorting :) > > Can you test the existing "tcp_lro_flush_all()" in combination with "tcp_lro_queue_mbuf()" and compare it to your version? Sorting is not as slow as you think. > > --HPS I will use the updated patch to test the hash and the queue_mbuf in Hyper-V. Thanks! REVISION DETAIL https://reviews.freebsd.org/D6689 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: sepherosa_gmail.com, rrs, gallatin, glebius, gnn, bz, rwatson, #transport, hselasky Cc: freebsd-net-list
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?f9ae9974d4f9264e193bb1c72f81b525>