Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 11 Jun 2007 22:39:27 +0200
From:      Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
To:        Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
Cc:        cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/net if.h
Message-ID:  <466DB2FF.9060300@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <466DACD6.4040606@errno.com>
References:  <200706112008.l5BK8CQ7033543@repoman.freebsd.org> <466DACD6.4040606@errno.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sam Leffler wrote:
> Andre Oppermann wrote:
>> andre       2007-06-11 20:08:12 UTC
>>
>>   FreeBSD src repository
>>
>>   Modified files:
>>     sys/net              if.h   Log:
>>   Add IFCAP_LRO flag for drivers to announce their TCP Large Receive 
>> Offload
>>   capabilities.
>>     Revision  Changes    Path
>>   1.108     +1 -0      src/sys/net/if.h
>> http://cvsweb.FreeBSD.org/src/sys/net/if.h.diff?r1=1.107&r2=1.108
>>
>>
> There are many offload capabilities defined that are not well thought 
> out.  In particular we do not distinguish between ipv4 and ipv6 for 
> things like cksum and tso so there's no way to disable individual 
> features.  The ability to tweak LRO is clearly needed and clearly belong 
> as an ifnet capability but unilateraly deciding this is the wrong approach.

We do distinguish between TSO4 and TSO6 since from the beginning.

LRO is not hardware dependent but done in software.  However it must
be handled from inside the drivers RX function.  Our software
implementation will be IPv4 and IPv6 aware right from the beginning.

It is not an unilateral decision if other directly affected developers
agree (Drew, Jack).

-- 
Andre



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?466DB2FF.9060300>