From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 23072 invoked from network); 20 Nov 2022 12:47:10 -0000 Received: from 9front.inri.net (168.235.81.73) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 20 Nov 2022 12:47:10 -0000 Received: from mail-vk1-f177.google.com ([209.85.221.177]) by 9front; Sun Nov 20 07:44:59 -0500 2022 Received: by mail-vk1-f177.google.com with SMTP id e2so4477029vkd.13 for <9front@9front.org>; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 04:44:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fwg06bN6dZEkL3m0WH6pM3ykaNoF4OSi3cMnuZbHHQM=; b=YimLiRvCjlWXcGrDfEkLYpwyAUduLhCFi0hSZMaUW6lr9oAVXPNCRGSgkZt+apHnPl h6oWjSM9exLwOuHJaV0P143c3dcnSuaXIB89whwWM5jpkKbuK/ncXIpyp8Fxm/6C5AsV ZpvkjQbHSyUZ0TvKPl2bHz4PPNp/IS/0m+e0bpDAwpXpYaGOwhhIarIWpRlhxQsywm/r ItdtUbJcp299n10WRp8wSpMu07wiC4r0/q4dQq1XKKkp07v5tv2yaCjGTocIKpvFRHeN tK8FxbqipXcRQpHSFCItDB6jdrdt3ha7Tl+FeAOOVmi9IOn8z362anVaqMrVmtbTbzSl UVQw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fwg06bN6dZEkL3m0WH6pM3ykaNoF4OSi3cMnuZbHHQM=; b=V/iT6eoI2LIhQti6rcILdD+UD4uUAVhgQZbr9I6Kwct7RXR51IiyG9K5CLKWaLf5IT lxPW3NyR8EB4DUX7FQkZADy+5Xv+eRBZKjxwpOxwHqlnBFRKhkVwAlVOVOH0sV27vylr uFYTz00ot/OMbwJePSO5oXimcF0TiWf79HRPinScA8OUntf9ljMBDZgSyNtErM1XSgwq hdaBXIQinuegHJNqPIBWtJr/U1mPYAsXDEWLoKyjC0KNlP3B74Zcrmiw/OXAH4B/9E+M 4aYSI5yUgkC/Mk/lS0sa89viQ70UKNbDrodTyU9y2PHtZVOelnYcIt2x5/wceJw9Mwe9 nFRw== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pkaUWMFH7VwCfHrAaPl4ILbUJLIAIgkJJcj+GTurEOowI8OM3wM 5OW/fd0VoLsG9nMp69Qd2l3fjeiVXi4g4zyrTxIgkT7O X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf4ZXHEuHDgyvrn7pPp41dFMywbis3FS0ioDEeh9aphDZQ2SlL4+1xwWy4wQwT4wCRVrGUvIPNrvCTGHn4yYfjs= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:6345:0:b0:3bc:65ea:864f with SMTP id x66-20020a1f6345000000b003bc65ea864fmr4203608vkb.30.1668948295009; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 04:44:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:ab0:60d7:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sun, 20 Nov 2022 04:44:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <632533984.161412.1668888549169@comcenter.netcologne.de> From: hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2022 13:44:54 +0100 Message-ID: To: 9front@9front.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: template scripting dependency singleton Subject: Re: [9front] [patch] ethervgbe: add rx checksum offloading Reply-To: 9front@9front.org Precedence: bulk my hunch is also that checksum offloading is not worth it, since we don't have any kind of fastpath in our packet forwarding (we memcpy every packet). also, if we did more computationally intensive work on the packet data, like aes encryption, i understand why somebody might want to use accelerators for that part. but those checksums are dirt-cheap, on any CPU. On 11/19/22, ori@eigenstate.org wrote: > Quoth Arne Meyer : >> Is hw offloading something we want? I ask because I think there is >> something wrong with ether8169 offloading and I'm working on a patch to >> fix or axe this. >> > > if it makes a real difference in performance and isn't too complex, it may > be worth it, but I suspect software is more than fast enough for > most of the cards we support. > >