From: "Dennis Cook" <cook@sandgate.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org
Subject: Re: Deactivating TCP checksumming
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 15:34:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b6i5t1$h0t$1@main.gmane.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 20030402205855.GA4125@gtf.org
Based on various feedback, on my RH Linux 2.4.18 kernel I tried the
following:
Set "features" bit NETIF_F_IP_CSUM set (the only feature bit set).
In my network driver start-transmit check for "CHECKSUM_HW" in ip_summed.
Using a small test program, use "sendfile" to copy a file to a network
socket FD.
Result is none of the packets presented to my network adapter driver have
ip_summed set to CHECKSUM_HW, so the SW IP stack has already
computed checksums.
Is this mechanism possibly broken on kernel 2.4?
"Jeff Garzik" <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:20030402205855.GA4125@gtf.org...
> On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 03:47:35PM -0500, Dennis Cook wrote:
> > What I was looking for is a general capability to keep the SW transport
> > stack from
> > computing outgoing TCP/UDP/IP checksums so that the HW can be allowed to
do
> > it,
> > similar to Windows checksum offload capability.
>
> If you are not using sendfile(2), it is _more expensive_ to offload
> checksums, because we already checksum and copy at the same time.
>
> Hardware checksum offload is only a win when a copy is eliminated.
>
> Therefore, _always_ offloading checksum is actually slower in some
> cases, because of the unneeded additional HW csum setup that would be
> performed.
>
> Jeff
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-04-03 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-04-01 12:12 Deactivating TCP checksumming shesha bhushan
2003-04-01 12:28 ` Matti Aarnio
2003-04-02 19:22 ` Dennis Cook
2003-04-02 20:36 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-02 20:47 ` Dennis Cook
2003-04-02 20:58 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-03 20:34 ` Dennis Cook [this message]
2003-04-03 20:47 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-03 20:57 ` Dennis Cook
2003-04-04 14:20 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-04-04 14:08 ` Abhishek Agrawal
2003-04-04 4:41 ` Ion Badulescu
2003-04-02 21:03 ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-04-02 21:22 ` Dennis Cook
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-04-01 9:47 shesha bhushan
2003-04-01 10:58 ` Matti Aarnio
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='b6i5t1$h0t$1@main.gmane.org' \
--to=cook@sandgate.com \
--cc=kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.