LRO support for IPv6

[Venkat Duvvuru]

Thanks for the response.

I observed that there is a significant performance drop in case of IPv6 on
the "rx" side.
While I'm able to hit line rate ~9.5 Gbps on a 10gb NIC for IPv4..I could
only get ~6 Gbps on the "rx" front for IPv6...However "tx" for IPv6 is on
par with IPv4 hitting almost line rates.

Could this be because of lack of LRO6??

Note: hwpmc profiling shows that most of the time is spent in the IPv6
stack code

/Venkat
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz at freebsd.org> wrote:

>
> On 22. May 2012, at 17:04 , Jack Vogel wrote:
>
> > Oh, that's right, distracted with other projects and I forgot, now we
> just need
> > to have an LRO that works with forwarding eh :)
>
> That's a 6 line bainaid commit afterwards, basically returning form the
> LRO queuing
> function in case forwarding is turned on for that address family;  a
> proper solution
> for long term can than be done whenever we feel like it.  The above we
> should have done
> years ago;)
>
>
> > You ROCK bz :)
> >
> > Jack
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Bjoern A. Zeeb <bz at freebsd.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 22. May 2012, at 16:50 , Jack Vogel wrote:
> >
> > > The LRO code as it stands right now is IPV4 specific, it would be nice
> to
> > > extend it, one of
> > > many improvements that may get done at some point.
> >
> > I am about to commit it to HEAD.  Bear another few days with me; I know
> > I am running late but committing new code had less prio than some other
> > real life things currently.
> >
> > I'll also bring TSO6, etc...
>
> --
> Bjoern A. Zeeb                                 You have to have visions!
>   It does not matter how good you are. It matters what good you do!
>
>