[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080807061535.GA7591@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 14:15:35 +0800
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: bhutchings@...arflare.com, buytenh@...tstofly.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, akarkare@...vell.com, nico@....org,
dale@...nsworth.org
Subject: Re: using software TSO on non-TSO capable netdevices
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 11:07:41PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
>
> We don't touch anything in the original TSO skb. However we expand
> the headroom (if necessary) and in the area in front of skb->data we
> build the header areas for the sub-TSO frames, one by one.
Or we could just allocate them beforehand, either way, it's one
operation per superpacket so it's cheap.
> This might be where we get pushed over the edge and have to add a
> dma_addr_t to sk_buff and skb_frag_struct. And that might not
> be such a bad thing because it will allow other things that
> we've always wanted to do.
Since the skb_frag struct is in the shared area where we have
to pad up to a power-of-two for kmalloc we usually have plenty
of free space anyway.
> Another nice aspect of this idea is that we can make the existing GSO
> code just build this funny "TSO plus hidden headers" SKB, and then do
> the by-hand unpacking into new SKB chunks that we will let smart
> drivers do directly into their TX rings.
>
> Herbert what do you think?
Yes this idea sounds perfect :)
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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