On Wednesday, May 21, 2014, Simon Horman <ho...@verge.net.au> wrote: > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 01:31:55PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote: > > On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 8:31 AM, Simon Horman > > <ho...@verge.net.au<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 07:30:38PM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote: > > >> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 4:07 PM, Simon Horman > > >> <ho...@verge.net.au<javascript:;>> > wrote: > > >> > diff --git a/datapath/linux/compat/include/linux/netdevice.h > b/datapath/linux/compat/include/linux/netdevice.h > > >> > index d726390..0381002 100644 > > >> > --- a/datapath/linux/compat/include/linux/netdevice.h > > >> > +++ b/datapath/linux/compat/include/linux/netdevice.h > > >> > +#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(2,6,38) > > >> > #define netif_skb_features rpl_netif_skb_features > > >> > netdev_features_t rpl_netif_skb_features(struct sk_buff *skb); > > >> > > >> Currently this function doesn't look at mpls_features. Should it for > > >> things other than TSO? > > > > > > It seems to me that rpl_netif_skb_features is only used by > > > rpl_dev_queue_xmit(). > > > > > > If that is the case then I don't think it is necessary to examine > > > mpls_features, which was introduced in v3.11, as rpl_dev_queue_xmit() > > > only exists for older kernel versions. > > > > Sorry, I actually meant for upstream. I agree that the compatibility > > code reflects current kernels as written. > > > > It seems like the checks in dev_hard_start_xmit() won't take > > mpls_features (or the presence of MPLS) into account when deciding > > whether to emulate the offload or pass the skb directly to the NIC. In > > the GSO code itself, we look at mpls_features but if we never get > > there then it will be too late. > > I am reasonably sure that when I merged the MPLS GSO code into mainline > that it worked for the case where a non-MPLS GSO packet became an MPLS GSO > packet (due to a push MPLS action). But that was a while ago and looking > over the code its not obvious to my why that case would work. > > I'll do some testing an analysis and propose a fix if necessary. > > Would that address your concern? >
Yes, that's fine.
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
