Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2017 11:11:24 +0100 From: "Robert N. M. Watson" <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa@gmail.com>, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RSS_UDP_IPV4_EX? Message-ID: <E43C698C-98D8-41DC-A97A-442FE31415E5@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmok5JePWFc-y9YhnjKptuw49wy-dw2kj_8Mk1Jnfb=VG7g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAMOc5cwL_Z15p3334jJ1SBtC3rP1Vn%2BtP_sFzSBeaMG1AK7sZA@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmok5JePWFc-y9YhnjKptuw49wy-dw2kj_8Mk1Jnfb=VG7g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
My recollection here is (quite) hazy, as it's been a while, but it's = likely that this was a transcription error. The set of hash types was = largely modelled on what Chelsio offered in the T3 (if I recall), and = also what was documented in the Microsoft RSS white paper, so it may be = worth taking a look at those sources to see if something makes itself = obvious. (There do seem to be some odd variations in hashing types supported by = various NICs -- e.g., hashing but with different hash algorithms in = certain generations of cards, etc, so it also wouldn't surprise me if it = did correspond to something real. Clearly the comment is not good enough = to explain that, if so!) Robert > On 2 Sep 2017, at 00:43, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > I seem to recall it was something some chipsets supported? I forget = the details. >=20 >=20 >=20 > -adrian >=20 >=20 > On 30 August 2017 at 00:07, Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa@gmail.com = <mailto:sepherosa@gmail.com>> wrote: > IPv4 UDP with extended headers o_O? Or it was just a mistake. >=20 > Thanks, > sephe >=20 > -- > Tomorrow Will Never Die >=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E43C698C-98D8-41DC-A97A-442FE31415E5>