[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240617170759.270f79f0@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 17:07:59 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Paul Barker <paul.barker.ct@...renesas.com>
Cc: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni
<pabeni@...hat.com>, Niklas Söderlund
<niklas.soderlund+renesas@...natech.se>, Biju Das
<biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>, Claudiu Beznea
<claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>, Lad Prabhakar
<prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>, Mitsuhiro Kimura
<mitsuhiro.kimura.kc@...esas.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 1/2] net: ravb: Fix maximum MTU for GbEth
devices
On Sat, 15 Jun 2024 11:30:37 +0100 Paul Barker wrote:
> The datasheets for all SoCs using the GbEth IP specify a maximum
> transmission frame size of 1.5 kByte. I've confirmed through internal
> discussions that support for 1522 byte frames has been validated, which
> allows us to support the default MTU of 1500 bytes after reserving space
> for the Ethernet header, frame checksums and an optional VLAN tag.
But what's the user impact? If we send a bigger frame the IP will hang?
Drop the packet? Something else?
"Validated" can also mean "officially supported" sometimes vendors just
say that to narrow down the test matrix :(
Powered by blists - more mailing lists