From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Sep  5 18:23:13 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 916)
	id A826F16A4DF; Tue,  5 Sep 2006 18:23:13 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 18:23:13 +0000
From: Prafulla Deuskar <pdeuskar@freebsd.org>
To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20060905182313.GA85389@hub.freebsd.org>
References: <2a41acea0609011551v40338539u4eef48d091dd12ab@mail.gmail.com>
	<44F9384C.9070902@freebsd.org>
	<2a41acea0609021741y481a04c0r42902166eaba78d7@mail.gmail.com>
	<20060905162542.GA63869@hub.freebsd.org>
	<44FDAF08.20407@freebsd.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <44FDAF08.20407@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 6.1-STABLE on an i386
Cc: freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>,
	freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>,
	Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: TSO patch for current
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 18:23:13 -0000

Andre Oppermann [andre@freebsd.org] wrote:
> Prafulla Deuskar wrote:
> >Jack Vogel [jfvogel@gmail.com] wrote:
> >
> >>On 9/2/06, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>I can't comment on the em part but the tcp_output.c stuff looks
> >>>very much like a straight port from NetBSD.  If we take code from
> >>>the other BSDs we have to remark this in the emails we send with
> >>>patches and the commit message (otherwise we get accused of 'stealing
> >>>without attribution').
> >>
> >>I dont know that I'd call it a straight port, rather I was working from 
> >>some
> >>prototype code that Prafulla had working back on 4.7, but I think at that
> >>time that he may have patterned it after NetBSD. 
> >
> >I don't think NetBSD had TSO support in 2002 when I first did the 4.7 
> >patch for internal testing.
> 
> OK, perhaps they lifted it from your patch then.  They just looks awfully
> similiar that's why I thought it came from NetBSD.
>
Your patch looks good and is the way to go.

So after Jack confirms that your patch works with the em driver
would you commit to to -current?

The driver related changes can follow..

Later we also need to fix ifconfig so that user can enable/disable TSO on the interface. 

Thanks,
-Prafulla


>