Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 22 May 2012 10:46:57 -0700
From:      Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
To:        Venkat Duvvuru <venkatduvvuru.ml@gmail.com>
Cc:        freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: LRO support for IPv6
Message-ID:  <CAFOYbcncAGPA6d7qh7bonGy2ijcApD_TQgqvSoM2Mbif-z8sYg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGdae7ZX4M4NPnJ=3K1vA9TLPW22r2EpTic-Y4kJMyJQGn3zGw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <CAGdae7bcWqGbObygPdZwCyVG4Pe-0Fxq5_p19oCp61uzZ4N8xw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFOYbc=ng83L8iZ_N79edqhknOrDPqVA9ASMexW5-yU0vnduDQ@mail.gmail.com> <A8DB9672-6B84-4635-84B6-43CC98B2877F@FreeBSD.org> <CAFOYbckwRw4jazwqY1S7X2wiSdBBBPdg-Xk8ya99j1%2BWbqB=DA@mail.gmail.com> <72B744D5-3D24-4A56-907C-2A8F6620877B@FreeBSD.org> <CAGdae7ZX4M4NPnJ=3K1vA9TLPW22r2EpTic-Y4kJMyJQGn3zGw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
LRO is a huge win for 10G (as is TSO on the TX side), so odds are good its
behind the drop,
in any case you'll be able to test that soon :)

Jack


On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Venkat Duvvuru <venkatduvvuru.ml@gmail.com
> wrote:

> Thanks for the response.
>
> I observed that there is a significant performance drop in case of IPv6 on
> the "rx" side.
> While I'm able to hit line rate ~9.5 Gbps on a 10gb NIC for IPv4..I could
> only get ~6 Gbps on the "rx" front for IPv6...However "tx" for IPv6 is on
> par with IPv4 hitting almost line rates.
>
> Could this be because of lack of LRO6??
>
> Note: hwpmc profiling shows that most of the time is spent in the IPv6
> stack code
>
> /Venkat
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@freebsd.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> On 22. May 2012, at 17:04 , Jack Vogel wrote:
>>
>> > Oh, that's right, distracted with other projects and I forgot, now we
>> just need
>> > to have an LRO that works with forwarding eh :)
>>
>> That's a 6 line bainaid commit afterwards, basically returning form the
>> LRO queuing
>> function in case forwarding is turned on for that address family;  a
>> proper solution
>> for long term can than be done whenever we feel like it.  The above we
>> should have done
>> years ago;)
>>
>>
>> > You ROCK bz :)
>> >
>> > Jack
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz@freebsd.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On 22. May 2012, at 16:50 , Jack Vogel wrote:
>> >
>> > > The LRO code as it stands right now is IPV4 specific, it would be
>> nice to
>> > > extend it, one of
>> > > many improvements that may get done at some point.
>> >
>> > I am about to commit it to HEAD.  Bear another few days with me; I know
>> > I am running late but committing new code had less prio than some other
>> > real life things currently.
>> >
>> > I'll also bring TSO6, etc...
>>
>> --
>> Bjoern A. Zeeb                                 You have to have visions!
>>   It does not matter how good you are. It matters what good you do!
>>
>>
>



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAFOYbcncAGPA6d7qh7bonGy2ijcApD_TQgqvSoM2Mbif-z8sYg>