From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754064AbYLAVSW (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:18:22 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752550AbYLAVSL (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:18:11 -0500 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:45807 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751516AbYLAVSK (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 16:18:10 -0500 Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 13:18:10 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20081201.131810.158631503.davem@davemloft.net> To: gallatin@myri.com Cc: ossthema@de.ibm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tklein@de.ibm.com, raisch@de.ibm.com, jb.billaud@gmail.com, hering2@de.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] lro: IP fragment checking From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <493423D7.5030203@myri.com> References: <4933A74F.3050809@de.ibm.com> <493423D7.5030203@myri.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.1 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Andrew Gallatin Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 12:50:15 -0500 > As to whether or not to do it in the drivers/hardware or in the > LRO code, I favor doing it in the LRO code just so that it is not > missed in some driver. Then there is no point in the hardware doing the check, if we're going to check it anyways. That's part of my point about why this check doesn't belong here.