Re: e1000 performance hack for ppc64 (Power4)

From: Lincoln Dale (
Date: Fri Jun 13 2003 - 20:52:53 EST

At 09:18 AM 14/06/2003 +1000, Anton Blanchard wrote:

> > Not really... one retransmit and the TCP header size grows
> > due to the SACK options.
>OK scratch that idea.

why not have a performance option that is a tradeoff between optimum
payload size versus efficiency.

unless i misunderstand the problem, you can certainly pad the TCP options
with NOPs ...

> > I find it truly bletcherous what you're trying to do here.
>I think so too, but its hard to ignore ~100Mbit/sec in performance.

another option is for the write() path is for instantant-send TCP sockets
to delay the copy_from_user() until the IP+TCP header size is known.
i wouldn't expect the net folks to like that, however ..



To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jun 15 2003 - 22:00:39 EST