netdev - Re: ip_summed setting for TCP pure-ACK packets

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

Date:	Mon, 08 Nov 2010 17:56:06 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	sf-linux-drivers <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: ip_summed setting for TCP pure-ACK packets

Le lundi 08 novembre 2010 à 16:35 +0000, Ben Hutchings a écrit :
> As we discussed at LPC:
> 
> Current controllers handled by the sfc driver have a per-queue (rather
> than per-packet) option for checksum generation.  Currently pure-ACK
> packets sent by TCP have ip_summed == CHECKSUM_NONE and we must send
> them on hardware queues with checksum generation disabled.  To support
> this, we allocate 2 hardware queues per core TX queue.
> 
> To reduce the risk of reordering (and possibly the number of hardware TX
> queues required), it would be helpful for TCP to set ip_summed ==
> CHECKSUM_PARTIAL on pure-ACK packets when the output device is known to
> support checksum generation.
> 
> Ben.
> 

Hmm

Do you mean commit 2e8e18ef52e7dd1af0a3bd1 is not enough ?



--
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