[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1004202108240.27476@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:10:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: crash with bridge and inconsistent handling of NETDEV_TX_OK
On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, David Miller wrote:
> From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:23:57 -0400 (EDT)
>
> > I have two NICs, each with 1500 MTU. The stack trace indicates that a
> > packet was received by one NIC and bridged to the other. The stack trace
> > also indicates that it went through GSO code path. The question is why?
> > How could a forwarded packet be so large to use GSO?
>
> GRO automatically accumulates packets together, accumulating them into
> larger super-packets. This is done regardless of input device feeding
> it.
>
> Can you understand this now? In software, we accumulate all incoming
> packets for a TCP stream into larger super-packets. Just because it's
> a bridging scenerio doesn't mean we disable GRO.
>
> These super-packets are being bridged, then forwarded out your
> destination device and GSO has to de-segment these GRO frames.
>
> GRO is done unconditionally, all the time, for all packets.
I see, but GRO is turned off on my interfaces, according to ethtool.
Mikulas
--
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