Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.

• To: David Miller <[email protected]>
• Subject: Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
• From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
• Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:49:09 -0700
• Authentication-results: sj-dkim-8.cisco.com; [email protected]; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com verified; );
• Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
• Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=453; t=1160538560; x=1161402560; c=relaxed/relaxed; s=sjdkim8002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; [email protected]; z=From:Roland=20Dreier=20<[email protected]> |Subject:Re=3A=20Dropping=20NETIF_F_SG=20since=20no=20checksum=20feature.; X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DUWxbUA/CLptfqUXU71TzDy5efyg=3D; b=sjVzACLHZqDRl2SG8Xdq9FLmS0Sh3F7fQtAXFhOPzSFrTOCbWADV91MQzoxZQm+CJvhqGia7 dHy/dM5m4VewufbR1RciYsRCO4wkaCAMQdw6CJskDQQb4utIHWmjxR3n;
• In-reply-to: <[email protected]> (David Miller's message of "Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:45:28 -0700 (PDT)")
• References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
• Sender: [email protected]
• User-agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.4.18 (linux)

    David> non-sendfile() paths will generate big packets just fine,
    David> as long as the application is providing that much data.

OK, cool.  Will the big packets be non-linear skbs?

Because then it would make sense for a device with a huge MTU to want
to accept them without linearizing them, even if it had to copy them
to checksum the data.  Otherwise with fragmented memory it would be
impossible to handle such big packets at all.

 - R.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
    • From: David Miller <[email protected]>

• References:
  • Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
    • From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
  • Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
    • From: David Miller <[email protected]>
  • Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
    • From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
  • Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
    • From: David Miller <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
• Next by Date: Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
• Previous by thread: Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
• Next by thread: Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]