From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Mar 25 15:16: 9 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from gw.errno.com (node-d1d4bd7a.powerinter.net [209.212.189.122]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A1C37B921; Sat, 25 Mar 2000 15:16:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from MELANGE (melange.errno.com [209.212.166.36]) by gw.errno.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with SMTP id PAA22995; Sat, 25 Mar 2000 15:16:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <077a01bf96af$73dab720$0132a8c0@MELANGE> From: "Sam Leffler" To: , , References: <200003252050.MAA08969@scv1.apple.com> Subject: Re: Request for review (HW checksum patches) Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 15:11:29 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG FWIW, Win2000 has a mechanism for dealing with what they call task offloading. If you decide to attack the problem, an inexpensive device you can use for testing is the 3C905B; it does IP+TCP checksums. Sam ----- Original Message ----- From: "Justin C. Walker" To: ; Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2000 12:49 PM Subject: Re: Request for review (HW checksum patches) > > From: Jonathan Lemon > > Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2000 13:35:53 -0600 > > To: net@FreeBSD.ORG, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG > > Subject: Request for review (HW checksum patches) > > X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre2i > > Delivered-to: freebsd-net@freebsd.org > > X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > > I have a set of patches which allows offloading checksums to > > NICs which support it (right now, only the Alteon based cards). > > The patch is at . > > This prompts a question on a related issue: there seems to be an increase > in support of protocol operations on NICs (e.g., tickle/keep-alive support > while the system is sleeping; IPSec; ...). Is there enough there to let us > build a general mechanism for communication between stack and driver for > this sort of thing (e.g., a "meta-data" slot in the packet header which > points to an mbuf, or other structure, that contains the details)? > > We're currently trying to deal with this in Mac OS X, and it'd be nice to > avoid having multiple wheels of different size and shape in the same source > base. > > Regards, > > Justin > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message