[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1227545468.3162.4.camel@achroite>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 16:51:08 +0000
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@...ibm.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tklein@...ibm.com, Christoph Raisch <raisch@...ibm.com>,
jb.billaud@...il.com, hering2@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] lro: ip fragment checking
On Mon, 2008-11-24 at 16:56 +0100, Jan-Bernd Themann wrote:
> Currently there is no checking in the LRO receive path whether
> TCP packets are ip fragmented. We should not consider
> those packets for aggregation.
> I'm not sure if this checking is actually required. Does anyone
> know if it is possible to get fragmented TCP packets without
> the tcp stack changing the MSS size?
> This patch introduces explicit checking. Any objections?
LRO depends on the hardware performing TCP checksum offload, and the TCP
checksum cannot be verified for IP fragments in isolation. So I think
drivers should not be passing fragments into inet_lro or should reject
them in its get_frag_header() or get_skb_header() method. Certainly sfc
doesn't pass fragments into inet_lro because they have not been
checksummed.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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