Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 01 Dec 2012 11:23:00 +0100
From:      Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
To:        Jack Vogel <jfvogel@gmail.com>
Cc:        Jack F Vogel <jfv@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r243714 - in head/sys/dev: ixgbe netmap
Message-ID:  <50B9DA84.8070701@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAFOYbcmC016-8X3SwoggWn-0gKJCkFUc8%2BuNykGm=fju8rFdNQ@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201211302219.qAUMJIkI065470@svn.freebsd.org> <50B9C291.4030107@freebsd.org> <CAFOYbcmC016-8X3SwoggWn-0gKJCkFUc8%2BuNykGm=fju8rFdNQ@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01.12.2012 10:48, Jack Vogel wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:40 AM, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org <mailto:andre@freebsd.org>> wrote:
>
>     On 30.11.2012 23:19, Jack F Vogel wrote:
>
>         Author: jfv
>         Date: Fri Nov 30 22:19:18 2012
>         New Revision: 243714
>         URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/__changeset/base/243714
>         <http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/243714>;
>
>         Log:
>             First of a series of 11 patches leading to new ixgbe version 2.5.0
>             This removes the header split and supporting code from the driver.
>
>
>     You did this because the datasheet says the header split feature is
>     not supported and using it gives unpredictable results?
>
>
> I'm not sure what the datasheet says, but yes there is a hardware issue
> on some of the 10G adapters if using header split. I have left the code in
> in a disabled state for a long time, thinking it would be there as example
> code, but I think it best to remove it and simplify the code at this point.

It says so in section 7.1.10 Header Splitting:
  Note: Header Splitting mode might cause unpredictable behavior and should not
  be used with the 82599. For more information, see the product specification
  update errata on this subject.

> Oh, and yes, results have always been mixed with the feature in my
> experience anyway.

I can imagine.  Considering how we work with the packet through the stack
and in the socket buffers there isn't much benefit from header splitting.

-- 
Andre




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50B9DA84.8070701>