[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTikLq909D9Dy7cfQRmgXoOiH11cQhA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 May 2011 20:19:05 +0200
From: Michał Mirosław <mirqus@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: shanwei@...fujitsu.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
eilong@...adcom.com, dm@...lsio.com, leedom@...lsio.com,
bhutchings@...arflare.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] net: use NETIF_F_ALL_TSO for vlan features
2011/5/5 David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>:
> From: Shan Wei <shanwei@...fujitsu.com>
> Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 13:20:52 +0800
>> As Dimitris Michailidis suggested, use NETIF_F_ALL_TSO for vlan_features,
>> which is a mask, but not hw_features.
> I do not understand why we want to advertise a set of ->vlan_features
> TSO flags that are different from the flags advertised in ->hw_features.
>
> Why do we want to do this?
I remember some posts about hardware that needs HW tag insertion for
TSO on VLAN to work or other additional constraints for offloads on
VLANs. I wonder if vlan_features handling should be converted to
something like ndo_fix_features.
Best Regards,
Michał Mirosław
--
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