> On Jul 13, 2018, at 1:27 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>
> Hey Lonnie,
>
> Wow, thanks for benching that (and watching the git repo for the
> experiment-of-the-day). This performance increase certainly exceeds my
> expectations; I'm quite pleased it's working so well.
Another huge
Hey Lonnie,
Wow, thanks for benching that (and watching the git repo for the
experiment-of-the-day). This performance increase certainly exceeds my
expectations; I'm quite pleased it's working so well.
You might, by the way, be interested in using Flent for testing. It's
slightly more
On Fri, 13 Jul 2018 08:49:45 -0500
Lonnie Abelbeck wrote:
> For certain lower-end x86 boxes I test, I noticed WG 0.0.20180708 w/NAPI
> actually slowed down receive performance.
>
> Jason recently added "receive: use gro call instead of plain call" [1]
> commit, which made a big performance
For certain lower-end x86 boxes I test, I noticed WG 0.0.20180708 w/NAPI
actually slowed down receive performance.
Jason recently added "receive: use gro call instead of plain call" [1] commit,
which made a big performance improvement.
Here is a test on a PC Engines APU2 ...
pbx4: AMD
