From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
To: John Heffner <jheffner@psc.edu>
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: A case AGAINST checksum offload
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 15:49:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20041112154945.63da5103.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0411121644150.8989@dexter.psc.edu>
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 18:46:11 -0500 (EST)
John Heffner <jheffner@psc.edu> wrote:
> Though I don't have any definitive references, I've heard stories that Sun
> turned off UDP checksums on LANs to increase NFS performance, only to
> re-enable checksumming by default after problems similar to mine caused
> corruptions of some critical databases.
That story about Sun is true. But it is an entirely different matter
to disable checksums altogether vs. disabling HW assisted checksumming.
> Since TCP checksum offload should only really helps the zero-copy case in
> terms of performance, it seems safer to turn off hardware checksumming by
> default, or perhaps only enable it if an application is doing a zero-copy
> send.
I disagree.
What is the difference between the CPU (a bus agent with computational
abilities), and a networking card (again, a bus agent with computational
abilities) computing the checksums?
In your listed case you found a bug, and it appears that what happened
is that the DMA transfer got corrupted to the networking card yet a
properly checksummed packet went out because the card computed the
checksum.
What would happen if this happened on a block device? Your filesystem
would get corrupted, perhaps irreparably.
How is this any different? It's a hard error for the DMA data to be
corrupted.
The data could just as easily be corrupted on the way to the CPU when
doing a copy+checksum operation. It's the same problem you say exists
with your networking card case except the path of the corruption is
RAM-->CPU instead of RAM-->PCI Controller-->Networking Card
I really don't buy this. :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-11-12 23:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-11-12 23:46 A case AGAINST checksum offload John Heffner
2004-11-12 23:49 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2004-11-13 0:36 ` John Heffner
2004-11-13 0:29 ` David S. Miller
2004-11-12 23:53 ` Dave Hansen
2004-11-12 23:56 ` John Heffner
2004-11-13 11:32 ` Francois Romieu
2004-11-14 20:01 ` Florian Weimer
2004-11-14 22:19 ` Pekka Pietikainen
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=20041112154945.63da5103.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jheffner@psc.edu \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).