On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 13:25 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 10:28 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
It depends if size of sg buffer(except for last one) in the sg list can be
divided by usb endpoint's max
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 13:25 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 10:28 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
It depends if size of sg buffer(except for last one) in the sg list can be
divided by usb endpoint's max
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 13:25 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 10:28 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
It depends if size of sg
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 22:52 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
[...]
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:34 PM, Ben Hutchings
bhutchi...@solarflare.com wrote:
Not that I have any experience with USB drivers, but perhaps
usb_sg_init()?
USB SG library doesn't support submitting SG URB asynchronously, but that
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 22:52 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
Maybe need to try it with TSO enabled, in my test on ax88179_178a NIC after
applying your disabling TSO patch, tx throughput is less than 600Mbps, but rx
is close to 900Mbps.
It looks like TCP stack could for this case allocate linear skbs
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 20:47 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:47 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 19:38 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:29 -0700, Grant
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 10:28 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
It depends if size of sg buffer(except for last one) in the sg list can be
divided by usb endpoint's max packet size(512 or 1024), at least there
is the constraint:
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2013-07-25 at 10:28 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
It depends if size of sg buffer(except for last one) in the sg list can be
divided by usb endpoint's max packet size(512 or 1024), at least there
is the constraint:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 20:47 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:47 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 19:38 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:29 -0700, Grant Grundler wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Eric Dumazet
From: Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 23:10:27 -0700
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 20:47 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
The real solution would be for someone to add SG support to the usbnet
core. Trying to support 1GbE with only linear skbs is not a great
idea... and it can
On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 16:46 -0700, David Miller wrote:
From: Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2013 23:10:27 -0700
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 20:47 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
The real solution would be for someone to add SG support to the usbnet
core. Trying to support
On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 16:56 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
A quick scan shows that smsc75xx, smsc95xx, and ax88179_178a all have
this problem.
Instead of the patch starting this thread, I'd like to see one that
hits all three drivers and removes all SG and TSO features bits from
both the
From: Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:05:10 -0700
On Tue, 2013-07-23 at 16:56 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
A quick scan shows that smsc75xx, smsc95xx, and ax88179_178a all have
this problem.
Instead of the patch starting this thread, I'd like to see one
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:46 PM, David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote:
...
A quick scan shows that smsc75xx, smsc95xx, and ax88179_178a all have
this problem.
Instead of the patch starting this thread, I'd like to see one that
hits all three drivers and removes all SG and TSO features bits
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Grant Grundler grund...@google.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:46 PM, David Miller da...@davemloft.net wrote:
...
A quick scan shows that smsc75xx, smsc95xx, and ax88179_178a all have
this problem.
Instead of the patch starting this thread, I'd like to
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 10:07 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Sat, 2013-07-20 at 17:16 +0800, fre...@asix.com.tw wrote:
From: Freddy Xin fre...@asix.com.tw
Disable TSO and SG network features in reset() and bind() functions,
and check the return value of skb_linearize() in tx_fixup() to
On Sat, 2013-07-20 at 17:16 +0800, fre...@asix.com.tw wrote:
From: Freddy Xin fre...@asix.com.tw
Disable TSO and SG network features in reset() and bind() functions,
and check the return value of skb_linearize() in tx_fixup() to prevent
TX throttling.
Signed-off-by: Freddy Xin
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I guess that if a driver does not advertise NETIF_F_SG, this
skb_linearize() call is not needed : All frames reaching your xmit
function should already be linear
As Ben Hutchings pointed out, hw_features is still
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:29 -0700, Grant Grundler wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I guess that if a driver does not advertise NETIF_F_SG, this
skb_linearize() call is not needed : All frames reaching your xmit
function should already
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 19:38 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:29 -0700, Grant Grundler wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com
wrote:
...
I guess that if a driver does not advertise NETIF_F_SG, this
skb_linearize() call is not
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:47 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 19:38 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 11:29 -0700, Grant Grundler wrote:
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Eric Dumazet eric.duma...@gmail.com
wrote:
...
I guess that if a driver does
21 matches
Mail list logo
