From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Herbert Xu Subject: Re: skb_warn_bad_offload with kernel 3.5 (maybe gso/bridge related ?) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 17:18:46 +0800 Message-ID: <20120806091846.GA18581@gondor.apana.org.au> References: <501B8792.6040605@univ-nantes.fr> <1343983887.9299.817.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1344008408.4642.160.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Eric Dumazet , Yann Dupont , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: Ben Hutchings Return-path: Received: from sting.hengli.com.au ([178.18.18.71]:40333 "EHLO fornost.hengli.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753881Ab2HFJS4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Aug 2012 05:18:56 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1344008408.4642.160.camel@deadeye.wl.decadent.org.uk> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Aug 03, 2012 at 04:40:08PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > I think GRO is doing the right thing, and I can't think why we should > see ip_summed = CHECKSUM_PARTIAL if the skb is forwarded by a bridge. I If it is was created by GRO then it should always be CHECKSUM_PARTIAL, even if it came through a bridge. Cheers, -- Email: Herbert Xu Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt