From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vlad Yasevich Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] core: Split out UFO6 support Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 15:43:50 -0500 Message-ID: <5491EB06.2060803@redhat.com> References: <1418840455-22598-1-git-send-email-vyasevic@redhat.com> <1418840455-22598-2-git-send-email-vyasevic@redhat.com> <1418847039.30883.29.camel@decadent.org.uk> Reply-To: vyasevic@redhat.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com, stefanha@redhat.com, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Ben Hutchings , Vladislav Yasevich Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1418847039.30883.29.camel@decadent.org.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 12/17/2014 03:10 PM, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2014-12-17 at 13:20 -0500, Vladislav Yasevich wrote: >> Split IPv6 support for UFO into its own feature similiar to TSO. >> This will later allow us to re-enable UFO support for virtio-net >> devices. > [...] >> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h >> index 6c8b6f6..8538b67 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h >> +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h >> @@ -372,6 +372,7 @@ enum { >> >> SKB_GSO_MPLS = 1 << 12, >> >> + SKB_GSO_UDP6 = 1 << 13 > > It seems like it would be cleaner to use the names SKB_GSO_UDPV{4,6}, > similarly to SKB_GSO_TCPV{4,6}. I wanted to try to avoid touched ipv4 paths if I could. I could use GSO_UDPV6 though. > >> }; >> >> #if BITS_PER_LONG > 32 >> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c >> index 945bbd0..fa4d2ee 100644 >> --- a/net/core/dev.c >> +++ b/net/core/dev.c > [...] >> @@ -5952,24 +5958,21 @@ static netdev_features_t netdev_fix_features(struct net_device *dev, > [...] >> + /* UFO also needs checksumming */ >> + if ((features & NETIF_F_UFO) && !(features & NETIF_F_GEN_CSUM) && >> + !(features & NETIF_F_IP_CSUM)) { > > You can use !(features & NETIF_F_V4_CSUM) instead of the last two terms. > >> + netdev_dbg(dev, >> + "Dropping NETIF_F_UFO since no checksum offload features.\n"); >> + features &= ~NETIF_F_UFO; >> + } >> + if ((features & NETIF_F_UFO6) && !(features & NETIF_F_GEN_CSUM) && >> + !(features & NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM)) { > [...] > > Similarly you can use !(features & NETIF_F_V6_CSUM) instead of the last > two terms. I made those to look the same as the TSO checks for consistency, but I can change these to be shorter like above. -vlad > > Aside from those minor points, this looks fine. > > Ben. >