On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> ....
> In looking at it, I think the conditions will be the same for
> NETIF_F_UFO; can you add it to the mix the same way as TSO?
>
Yes.
> ...
> I think a comment noting that we don't need to check is
> sufficient.
>
How does the following look?
---
Add NETIF_F_TSO (NETIF_F_UFO) to BOND_INTERSECT_FEATURES so that it can
be used by a bonding device iff all its slave devices support TSO (UFO).
Signed-off-by: Arthur Kepner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Arthur
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
@@ -1145,7 +1145,8 @@ int bond_sethwaddr(struct net_device *bo
}
#define BOND_INTERSECT_FEATURES \
- (NETIF_F_SG|NETIF_F_IP_CSUM|NETIF_F_NO_CSUM|NETIF_F_HW_CSUM)
+ (NETIF_F_SG|NETIF_F_IP_CSUM|NETIF_F_NO_CSUM|NETIF_F_HW_CSUM|\
+ NETIF_F_TSO|NETIF_F_UFO)
/*
* Compute the common dev->feature set available to all slaves. Some
@@ -1168,6 +1169,16 @@ static int bond_compute_features(struct
NETIF_F_HW_CSUM)))
features &= ~NETIF_F_SG;
+ /*
+ * features will include NETIF_F_TSO (NETIF_F_UFO) iff all
+ * slave devices support NETIF_F_TSO (NETIF_F_UFO), which
+ * implies that all slaves also support scatter-gather
+ * (NETIF_F_SG), which implies that features also includes
+ * NETIF_F_SG. So no need to check whether we have an
+ * illegal combination of NETIF_F_{TSO,UFO} and
+ * !NETIF_F_SG
+ */
+
features |= (bond_dev->features & ~BOND_INTERSECT_FEATURES);
bond_dev->features = features;
@@ -4080,6 +4091,8 @@ static void bond_ethtool_get_drvinfo(str
static struct ethtool_ops bond_ethtool_ops = {
.get_tx_csum = ethtool_op_get_tx_csum,
+ .get_tso = ethtool_op_get_tso,
+ .get_ufo = ethtool_op_get_ufo,
.get_sg = ethtool_op_get_sg,
.get_drvinfo = bond_ethtool_get_drvinfo,
};
