netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: ben@decadent.org.uk
Cc: jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, bruce.w.allan@intel.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, gospo@redhat.com, sassmann@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [net-next] e1000e: remove use of IP payload checksum
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 17:37:52 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120630.173752.1993136000245136259.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1341092196.4852.43.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk>

From: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2012 22:36:36 +0100

> On Sat, 2012-06-30 at 03:35 -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
>> From: Bruce Allan <bruce.w.allan@intel.com>
>> 
>> Currently only used when packet split mode is enabled with jumbo frames,
>> IP payload checksum (for fragmented UDP packets) is mutually exclusive with
>> receive hashing offload since the hardware uses the same space in the
>> receive descriptor for the hardware-provided packet checksum and the RSS
>> hash, respectively.  Users currently must disable jumbos when receive
>> hashing offload is enabled, or vice versa, because of this incompatibility.
>> Since testing has shown that IP payload checksum does not provide any real
>> benefit, just remove it so that there is no longer a choice between jumbos
>> or receive hashing offload but not both as done in other Intel GbE drivers
>> (e.g. e1000, igb).
>> 
>> Also, add a missing check for IP checksum error reported by the hardware;
>> let the stack verify the checksum when this happens.
> [...]
> 
> The change to enable RX hashing in 3.4, with this odd restriction seems
> to have broken most existing systems using jumbo MTU on e1000e.  None of
> the distro scripts or network management daemons will automatically
> change offload configuration before MTU; how could they know?
> 
> Therefore this needs to be fixed in 3.5 and 3.4.y, not net-next.

Agreed.

  reply	other threads:[~2012-07-01  0:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-30 10:35 [net-next] e1000e: remove use of IP payload checksum Jeff Kirsher
2012-06-30 21:36 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-07-01  0:37   ` David Miller [this message]
2012-07-01  5:32     ` Jeff Kirsher

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=20120630.173752.1993136000245136259.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ben@decadent.org.uk \
    --cc=bruce.w.allan@intel.com \
    --cc=gospo@redhat.com \
    --cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sassmann@redhat.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).