search for: msg252642

...om> >> --- > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet at google.com> > > Daniel & Francesco, this should address the performance problem you > tried to address with ("tcp: rcvbuf autotuning improvements") > > ( http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg252642.html ) Applied, thanks everyone.

...om> >> --- > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet at google.com> > > Daniel & Francesco, this should address the performance problem you > tried to address with ("tcp: rcvbuf autotuning improvements") > > ( http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg252642.html ) Applied, thanks everyone.

...Michael Dalton <mwdalton at google.com> > --- Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet at google.com> Daniel & Francesco, this should address the performance problem you tried to address with ("tcp: rcvbuf autotuning improvements") ( http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg252642.html ) Thanks !

The virtio_net driver's mergeable receive buffer allocator uses 4KB packet buffers. For MTU-sized traffic, SKB truesize is > 4KB but only ~1500 bytes of the buffer is used to store packet data, reducing the effective TCP window size substantially. This patch addresses the performance concerns with mergeable receive buffers by allocating MTU-sized packet buffers using page frag allocators.

The virtio_net driver's mergeable receive buffer allocator uses 4KB packet buffers. For MTU-sized traffic, SKB truesize is > 4KB but only ~1500 bytes of the buffer is used to store packet data, reducing the effective TCP window size substantially. This patch addresses the performance concerns with mergeable receive buffers by allocating MTU-sized packet buffers using page frag allocators.