Claudio Jeker <cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com> wrote: > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 07:02:08PM +0000, Stuart Henderson wrote: > > On 2018-07-21, Adonis Peralta <doni...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Is there a reason why the offloading features shouldn???t work correctly > > > on OpenBSD? > > > > If you can figure out why it doesn't work, you'll be well on the way to > > fixing it. > > > > > i350 supports offloading just fine via the igb driver on FreeBSD. Is > > > it more work on the driver thats needed? > > > > Different OS, different driver.. > > > > No idea if it's the case with i350 too, but checksum offload has been > > rather underwhelming when supported on some other NICs. > > We had to turn of many of the HW features used by other OS becuase of HW > bugs. em(4) is not an exception. Lately it has become more obvious that > most of those offload features are either bad for you or the gain does not > really justify the effort. The amount of bugs we hit because of such > features are countless. NFS and multicast packets are just two things to > mention which broke on Intel cards when enabling some of the offloading > features. I lost interest in offloading since CPUs are now fast enough.
My favorite hw offloading bug was in the Tehuti 10G ethernet, which would perform ipv4 checksumming against non-ipv4 packets. Fantastic fun. When hardware has a feature, it doesn't mean require you to use it. You need to JUSTIFY the need. Just recently, we failed to support the intel debug registers, we hadn't felt the yearning to support a feature other architectures don't have an exact similar feature for. As a result everyone else had the pop ss bug, but we avoided it. It's science. So Adonis, steps for you are: 1) Stop complaining. 2) JUSTIFY the need. 3) Do the work. End of story.
