Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:28:10 -0600 From: Sebastian Kuzminsky <seb@lineratesystems.com> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: fragmentation problem in FreeBSD 7 Message-ID: <CAN=597T93_=y2yYQ86Br876gOLh=S780Q6dhEP08AYv4-LSKHw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20121026135354.GD70741@FreeBSD.org> References: <CAN=597Rb-ToBQuJ%2BYet9e25Hbt-QmLJPKUXGf1pFEbVsRvFONg@mail.gmail.com> <20121026135354.GD70741@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> wrote: > Thanks for submission! > > I'm about to commit the attached patch to head. Can you please review it? > Haven't I missed anything important? > Looks good to me. Thanks for also including the sw_csum cleanup, that code had me scratching my head for a whole morning. :-) I have also moved from CSUM_DELAY_IP to CSUM_IP. AFAIU, the alias > CSUM_DELAY_IP > was made to match CSUM_DELAY_DATA. But to my point of view it makes it more > difficult to understand code, because a person reading code sees different > constants in the stack and in drivers. Since your change touches every line > in the stack, that utilizes CSUM_DELAY_IP, I decided to consistently use > CSUM_IP constant. > I agree with this. I did not understand why the original code use CSUM_DELAY_IP instead of the more obvious CSUM_IP, but i felt too timid to change it ;-) > Totus tuus, Glebius. > Et tuus, thanks for taking the time to review and clean up my patch! -- Sebastian Kuzminsky Linerate Systems
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN=597T93_=y2yYQ86Br876gOLh=S780Q6dhEP08AYv4-LSKHw>