| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2008 22:31:00 -0800 From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@...adcom.com> To: "'David Miller'" <davem@...emloft.net> cc: "linux-kernel@...eteddy.net" <linux-kernel@...eteddy.net>, "daniel.blueman@...il.com" <daniel.blueman@...il.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-net@...r.kernel.org" <linux-net@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: time for TCP ECN defaulting to on? David Miller wrote: > From: "Michael Chan" <mchan@...adcom.com> > Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2008 17:16:03 -0800 > > > I think this is no longer a limitation. The GSO code will take care > > of ECN properly if the hardware does not support it when doing TSO. > > Hmm, good point, but if that is what happens I don't know if I agree > with it. > > If "take care of ECN" means doing TSO in software, that's in my > opinion the wrong thing to do. > Right, it means TSO will be done in software by the GSO code if ECE or CWR is set in a TSO frame and the driver indicates that the hardware cannot segment such packets properly. This allows TSO and ECN to coexist. Before this, ECN was always disabled when TSO was enabled. Assuming ECE and CWR are set infrequently on TSO frames, we still benefit from hardware TSO most of the time. Why is it the wrong thing to do? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists