From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: "David S.Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: mchan@broadcom.com, netdev@oss.sgi.com, ffan@broadcom.com,
lusinsky@broadcom.com
Subject: Re: A new driver for Broadcom bcm5706
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 19:30:01 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <428E72F9.3070404@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050520.152836.48528379.davem@davemloft.net>
David S.Miller wrote:
> From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
> Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 15:42:20 -0400
>>10) [additional review] doesn't bnx2_rx_int() need to move the rmb()
>>inside the loop? Are you protecting against the compiler
>>reordering/caching loads/stores, or against SMP CPUs?
>
>
> This rmb() is needed to strongly order the status block consumer
> index read, from that of the descriptor data. I'm pretty sure it's
> in the right spot.
>
>
>>10.1) [additional review] is the rmb() even needed in bnx2_rx_int(),
>>since its caller also uses rmb()?
>
>
> No, it's guarding status block consumer index read to the first
> RX descriptor read, as explained above.
OK
>>13) [additional review] why is CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY used when
>>cksum==0xffff or cksum==0 ?
>>
>>+ u16 cksum = rx_hdr->l2_fhdr_tcp_udp_xsum;
>>+
>>+ if ((cksum == 0xffff) || (cksum == 0)) {
>>+ skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
>>+ }
>
>
> For UDP, a checksum value of zero means no checksum at all.
Sure. What I'm driving at is that a checksum of zero seems to imply
CHECKSUM_NONE not CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY. tg3 only does the 0xffff check.
I am also a bit surprised that, if the actual checksum value is
available, why not use CHECKSUM_HW like sunhme?
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-20 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-20 17:15 A new driver for Broadcom bcm5706 Michael Chan
2005-05-20 19:42 ` Jeff Garzik
2005-05-20 20:51 ` Jeff Garzik
2005-05-20 21:07 ` Ben Greear
2005-05-20 21:09 ` Jeff Garzik
2005-05-20 20:17 ` Michael Chan
2005-05-20 21:58 ` Ben Greear
2005-05-20 22:28 ` David S. Miller
2005-05-20 23:04 ` Michael Chan
2005-05-21 4:35 ` David S. Miller
2005-05-21 4:36 ` David S. Miller
2005-05-20 23:30 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2005-05-20 23:45 ` David S. Miller
2005-05-21 0:01 ` Jeff Garzik
2005-05-20 23:11 ` Michael Chan
2005-05-21 4:28 ` David S. Miller
2005-05-20 21:18 ` Jeff Garzik
2005-05-27 7:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-05-27 15:58 ` Michael Chan
2005-05-27 17:15 ` Christoph Hellwig
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=428E72F9.3070404@pobox.com \
--to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ffan@broadcom.com \
--cc=lusinsky@broadcom.com \
--cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
--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).