From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 25 14:23:21 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9299837B401; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:23:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from elvis.mu.org (elvis.mu.org [192.203.228.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1D543F75; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:23:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mux@freebsd.org) Received: by elvis.mu.org (Postfix, from userid 1920) id 0D3A92ED3F8; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 14:23:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 23:23:21 +0100 From: Maxime Henrion To: Mike Silbersack Message-ID: <20030325222321.GG57674@elvis.mu.org> References: <20030325220044.DA39F37B401@hub.freebsd.org> <20030325160051.H580@odysseus.silby.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030325160051.H580@odysseus.silby.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 tests=EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES, REPLY_WITH_QUOTES,USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) cc: Bill Paul cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/conf options src/sys/netinet ip_output.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 22:23:24 -0000 Mike Silbersack wrote: > > On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Bill Paul wrote: > > > > > > > FWIW, the two drivers I tested this with (if_xl and if_sis) both flunk. > > > if_xl tries to fix the situation, but fails, and if_sis goes totally > > > weird, eating mbufs and rendering the interface unuseable. > > > > > > I'll test more interfaces once I have these two fixed. > > > > Just how long did you make the fragment chain in your tests anyway? > > > > -Bill > > Well over 63 fragments. > > I'm not sure what the worst case chain that could be created by an > application is, but it seems wise to make sure the drivers can handle > whatever you throw at them. > > One of the reasons if_xl fails, even though it tries to recover is > probably because m_copypacket doesn't copy fragments resident inside mbuf > clusters, thereby defeating the attempt at defragmentation. I'm going to > whip up a m_defragment function we can use in all drivers on long chains > soon. I don't get what you're saying there, if_xl doesn't use m_copypacket() but m_copydata(). Cheers, Maxime