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: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:11:24 -0700 From: Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com> To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> CC: Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Add ETHTOOL_[GS]FLAGS sub-ioctls Jeff Garzik wrote: > This patch copies Auke in adding NETIF_F_LRO. Is that just for > temporary merging, or does the net core really not touch it at all? > > Because, logically, if NETIF_F_LRO exists nowhere else but this patch, > we should not add it to dev->features. LRO knowledge can be contained > entirely within the driver, if the net core never tests NETIF_F_LRO. > > I haven't reviewed the other NETIF_F_XXX flags, but, that logic can be > applied to any other NETIF_F_XXX flag: if the net stack isn't using it, > it's a piece of information specific to that driver. I believe LRO is going to have to be disabled for routing/bridging, so the stack will probably need to become aware of it at some point... Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com - 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