netdev - Re: [NET] IOC3: Switch hw checksumming to ethtool configurable.

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <46AE44DE.8000107@garzik.org>
Date:	Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:06:54 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [NET] IOC3: Switch hw checksumming to ethtool configurable.

Ralf Baechle wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>

applied to #upstream (2.6.24)


> I've previously sent out this patch a long time ago.  At that time I was
> told NETIF_F_IP_CSUM wouldn't make any sense without NETIF_F_SG.  IOC3's
> S/G abilities are very limited; it can do upto three segments of which
> the first one is upto 104 bytes and part of the packet's TX ring entry,
> the second and 3rd ones can be anywhere in the 64-bit PCI address space
> but may not cross a 16kB page boundary.  So setting NETIF_F_SG isn't
> really an option unless the IOC3 was going to linearize any packet it
> can't cope with itself.
> 
> So the big question, does NETIF_F_IP_CSUM without NETIF_F_SG make sense?

Conventional wisdom has always been that NETIF_F_SG is required if 
NETIF_F_*CSUM is present, and vice versa.

I admit I've not verified this in the past year or two.

	Jeff


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html