From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 00/11] udp gso
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:50:10 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <20180418.135010.273233202471255234.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20180417200059.30154-1-willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, willemb@google.com
To: willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:46116 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752091AbeDRRuM (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Wed, 18 Apr 2018 13:50:12 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20180417200059.30154-1-willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2018 16:00:50 -0400

> Segmentation offload reduces cycles/byte for large packets by
> amortizing the cost of protocol stack traversal.
> 
> This patchset implements GSO for UDP.

This looks great.

And as mentioned in other emails, the interface looks good too by letting
the app choose the segmentation point.

It's a real shame we lose checksumming with MSG_MORE, perhaps we can find
a way to lift that restriction?