netdev - e1000e max frame calculation

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

Message-ID: <5522B685.2030104@cchtml.com>
Date:	Mon, 06 Apr 2015 11:38:29 -0500
From:	Michael Cronenworth <mike@...tml.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: e1000e max frame calculation

Hello,

I have attempted to discuss this with upstream directly[1], but they will not 
respond to me. I will now attempt here.

The e1000e driver uses a different maximum frame calculation after a commit[2] in 
kernel 3.15. This caused everyone's setups that were using 9000 for MTU to break 
after they rebooted on their kernel update. The addition of the VLAN bytes force 
users to use 8996.

Other drivers appear to be using the "old" maximum frame calculation and can 
continue to use 9000.

Can a standard be decided upon that all drivers use or is it acceptable that one 
driver "does its own thing?"

Thanks,
Michael

[1] https://sourceforge.net/p/e1000/bugs/459/
[2] 
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c?id=c751a3d58cf2dae89ec941a259025b0175d67b0c
--
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