Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2006 13:20:26 +0100 From: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@FreeBSD.org>, Paolo Pisati <piso@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 111230 for review Message-ID: <4578070A.2030609@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20061207110225.GU32700@FreeBSD.org> References: <200612062319.kB6NJgsq031755@repoman.freebsd.org> <20061207110225.GU32700@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 11:19:42PM +0000, Paolo Pisati wrote: > P> http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=111230 > P> > P> Change 111230 by piso@piso_newluxor on 2006/12/06 23:19:06 > P> > P> To workaround a problem when an mbuf is bigger than MCLBYTES > P> (and thus not handled by m_megapullup()), introduce & use > P> m_jumbo16pullup() that uses 16k jumbo size cluster. > P> > P> This problem only showed up on traffic generated on a box with > P> a nic tso enabled. > > Paolo, > > this isn't a fix. Another application will do write(,, 16k + 1) and > m_jumbo16pullup() will fail again. Please backout it, it is a hack. > > We need to fix TSO in such way that real packets, that will be > transmitted to wire, will be passed to pfil handlers. That is not possible. -- Andre
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4578070A.2030609>