From nobody Tue Feb 8 17:06:20 2022 X-Original-To: freebsd-net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94EE519C2027; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 17:06:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from mail.turbocat.net (turbocat.net [88.99.82.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4JtTv45cYyz4flg; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 17:06:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from [10.36.2.165] (unknown [178.17.145.105]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.turbocat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B701D2605A8; Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:06:32 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <78fb51be-523d-55dd-9648-1ee4431e3861@selasky.org> Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 18:06:20 +0100 List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.1 Subject: Re: Receive Side Coalescing(RSC) and LRO Content-Language: en-US To: Wei Hu , "freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org" Cc: "freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org" References: From: Hans Petter Selasky In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4JtTv45cYyz4flg X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of hps@selasky.org designates 88.99.82.50 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=hps@selasky.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.30 / 15.00]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:mail.turbocat.net]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[selasky.org]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(1.00)[1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-hackers,freebsd-net]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:88.99.0.0/16, country:DE]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N On 2/8/22 16:32, Wei Hu wrote: > Hi, > > I am trying to find the term that FreeBSD uses for the network offloading feature like RSC. RSC is Microsoft's term which is essentially the same as LRO in Linux, in which the packet aggregation happens on the hardware NIC. > > The LRO on FreeBSD seems different. It looks to be the GRO in Linux, in which the packet aggregation happens in software above the NIC driver. There is a feature bit IFCAP_LRO in net/if.h. > > So, is there a different feature bit on FreeBSD which means only for the hardware RSC/LRO? Or does the IFCAP_LRO mean both hardware and software LRO? What I want to achieve is to let user disable the hardware RSC/LRO and leave software LRO untouched on FreeBSD. What is the proper way to differentiate these two on FreeBSD? > > Thanks, > Wei > Adding: RSS assisted sorted LRO New child needs new name? --HPS