On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 08:01:03 +0800 Jason Xing wrote: > On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 1:44 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 25 Aug 2025 21:53:33 +0800 Jason Xing wrote: > > > copy mode: 1,109,754 pps > > > batch mode: 2,393,498 pps (+115.6%) > > > xmit.more: 3,024,110 pps (+172.5%) > > > zc mode: 14,879,414 pps > > > > I've asked you multiple times to add comparison with the performance > > of AF_PACKET. What's the disconnect? > > Sorry for missing the question. I'm not very familiar with how to run the > test based on AF_PACKET. Could you point it out for me? Thanks. > > I remember the very initial version of AF_XDP was pure AF_PACKET. So > may I ask why we expect to see the comparison between them? Pretty sure I told you this at least twice but the point of AF_XDP is the ZC mode. Without a comparison to AF_PACKET which has similar functionality optimizing AF_XDP copy mode seems unjustified.
