From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: xen.git branch reorg Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:46:53 -0700 Message-ID: <49F60BAD.90606@goop.org> References: <782611.11477.qm@web56104.mail.re3.yahoo.com> <49F2179E.60802@goop.org> <1240846534.29824.101.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1240846534.29824.101.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Campbell Cc: "bderzhavets@yahoo.com" , Xen-devel , Christophe Saout , =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Pasi?= List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Ian Campbell wrote: > My guess would be the change from > CHECKSUM_{HW,etc}+skb->proto_{csum,data}_valid to > CHECKSUM_{UNNECESSARY,PARTIAL,etc} is incomplete/incorrect. This should > be taken care of by f4f969ffe1d9326ccaace768bde3b33a5ae49e71. I saw > checksum offloading issues early on when I did this but I thought I got > it right eventually, I'm pretty certain it was OK for me at the time at > least. > It looks like the checksum is a secondary issue. My understanding is that things like TSO, USO, LRO, etc, depend on hardware checksumming, so disabling checksumming will implicitly disable the large segment features too. And judging from Christophe's report, it seems that's the issue, with unexpectedly large packets appearing in dom0. J