On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 02:01:37AM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:58:52PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > A> On 26.10.2012 23:06, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > A> > Author: glebius > A> > Date: Fri Oct 26 21:06:33 2012 > A> > New Revision: 242161 > A> > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/242161 > A> > > A> > Log: > A> > o Remove last argument to ip_fragment(), and obtain all needed > information > A> > on checksums directly from mbuf flags. This simplifies code. > A> > o Clear CSUM_IP from the mbuf in ip_fragment() if we did checksums in
I'm not sure whether ti(4)'s checksum offloading for IP fragmented packets(CSUM_IP_FRAGS) still works after this change. ti(4) requires CSUM_IP should be set for IP fragmented packets. Not sure whether it's a bug or not. I have a ti(4) controller but I don't remember where I can find it and don't have a link parter(1000baseSX) to test it. :-( > A> > hardware. Some driver may not announce CSUM_IP in theur if_hwassist, > A> > although try to do checksums if CSUM_IP set on mbuf. Example is > em(4). em(4) had TX IP checksum offloading support but it was removed without justification. There could be some reason on that decision but I don't see any compelling reason. > A> > A> I'm not getting your description here? Why work around a bug in a driver > A> in ip_fragment() when we can fix the bug in the driver? > > Well, that was actually bug in the stack and a very special driver that > demonstrates it. I may even agree that driver is incorrect, but the stack was > incorrect, too. > > -- > Totus tuus, Glebius. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
