[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080615014657.GB2835@solarflare.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 02:46:58 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, kmansley@...arflare.com,
shemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Disable forwarding of LRO skbs
Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 12:02:27PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >
> > > My understanding is that at the points I'm adding the check, we're only
> > > considering received skbs and gso_size will only be set if LRO was used.
> >
> > Unfortunately that's not the case. The forwarding path can and
> > does occur for GSO packets sent from other guests. The obvious
> > case would be a GSO packet from a guest forwarded by the host
> > (as opposed to bridged) to the outside world.
>
> Can we distinguish them by testing skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_PARTIAL?
> That is a requirement for using hardware segmentation offload (see
> netif_needs_gso()) but an skb resulting from LRO should have ip_summed
> set to either CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY or CHECKSUM_NONE.
Actually, it seems like there's a cleaner test: gso_size != 0 &&
gso_type == 0 (if we really want GSO then the latter must be set).
I'll have to try that out.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists