public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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
>
>




  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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox