From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Ethernet Bridging: Enable Hardware Checksumming Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 11:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20050519.115141.21926463.davem@davemloft.net> References: <428CAC55.4000202@us.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, jdmason@us.ibm.com, shemminger@osdl.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: niv@us.ibm.com In-Reply-To: <428CAC55.4000202@us.ibm.com> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Nivedita Singhvi Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 08:10:13 -0700 > Fair point - though I would argue that devices that > support SG are much more common now - so optimizing > for the more common case might be preferable - since > people using bridging with devices that support > checksum offload are taking quite a hit when they > do bridging - perhaps this could be a conditional? I disagree. Many low costs devices are non-SG still, there is no reason to penalize them explicitly. I think instead we should look at ways to propagate the hardware device features to the bridge. Even if a bridge is composed of multiple devices, we just advertise the subset of features actually supported.