Re: [PATCH net-next v7 0/9] Add support for providers with large rx buffer

From: Paolo Abeni
Date: Tue Dec 02 2025 - 09:44:43 EST


On 12/1/25 12:35 AM, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
> Note: it's net/ only bits and doesn't include changes, which shoulf be
> merged separately and are posted separately. The full branch for
> convenience is at [1], and the patch is here:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/7486ab32e99be1f614b3ef8d0e9bc77015b173f7.1764265323.git.asml.silence@xxxxxxxxx
>
> Many modern NICs support configurable receive buffer lengths, and zcrx and
> memory providers can use buffers larger than 4K/PAGE_SIZE on x86 to improve
> performance. When paired with hw-gro larger rx buffer sizes can drastically
> reduce the number of buffers traversing the stack and save a lot of processing
> time. It also allows to give to users larger contiguous chunks of data. The
> idea was first floated around by Saeed during netdev conf 2024 and was
> asked about by a few folks.
>
> Single stream benchmarks showed up to ~30% CPU util improvement.
> E.g. comparison for 4K vs 32K buffers using a 200Gbit NIC:
>
> packets=23987040 (MB=2745098), rps=199559 (MB/s=22837)
> CPU %usr %nice %sys %iowait %irq %soft %idle
> 0 1.53 0.00 27.78 2.72 1.31 66.45 0.22
> packets=24078368 (MB=2755550), rps=200319 (MB/s=22924)
> CPU %usr %nice %sys %iowait %irq %soft %idle
> 0 0.69 0.00 8.26 31.65 1.83 57.00 0.57
>
> This series adds net infrastructure for memory providers configuring
> the size and implements it for bnxt. It's an opt-in feature for drivers,
> they should advertise support for the parameter in the qops and must check
> if the hardware supports the given size. It's limited to memory providers
> as it drastically simplifies implementation. It doesn't affect the fast
> path zcrx uAPI, and the sizes is defined in zcrx terms, which allows it
> to be flexible and adjusted in the future, see Patch 8 for details.
>
> A liburing example can be found at [2]
>
> full branch:
> [1] https://github.com/isilence/linux.git zcrx/large-buffers-v7
> Liburing example:
> [2] https://github.com/isilence/liburing.git zcrx/rx-buf-len

Dump question, hoping someone could answer in a very short time...

Differently from previous revisions, this is not a PR, just a plain
patch series - that in turn may cause duplicate commits when applied on
different trees.

Is the above intentional? why?

Thanks,

Paolo