On Tue, 8 Oct 2019 23:29:59 -0700, Samudrala, Sridhar wrote:

On 10/8/2019 5:49 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

quoted

I asked you to add numbers for handling those use cases in the kernel
directly.  

Forgot to explicitly mention that I didn't see any regressions with 
xdp1, xdp2 or xdpsock in default mode with these patches. Performance 
remained the same.

I'm not looking for regressions. The in-kernel path is faster, and
should be used for speeding things up rather than a "direct path to
user space". Your comparison should have 3 numbers - current AF_XDP,
patched AF_XDP, in-kernel handling.