On Tue, 29 May 2007 17:10:52 -0700 "Michael Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 07:36 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > > > I just checked e1000 and it's correct as it does use the csum_offset > > when doing TX offload. However, you're definitely right that bnx2 > > seems to be broken. > > > > > A few devices take a offset, starting point, and insertion point. This > > > looks like > > > the correct model. But no upper layer protocols other than IPV4/IPV6 can > > > do checksum > > > offload at present, so it seems moot. > > > > I could easily whip up a patch to get GRE to use it for a start :) > > > > > IMHO the correct solution would be to get rid if NETIF_F_HW_SUM and make > > > a new flag > > > NETIF_F_IPV6_SUM. Devices that can checksum both could do > > > NETIF_F_IPV4_SUM|NETI_F_IPV6_SUM. > > > > We should definitely keep NETIF_F_HW_SUM for sane hardware such as the > > e1000. Unfortunately we may just have to invent IPV6_SUM for the broken > > ones. > > > > Ccing Michael to see if the bnx2 chip can actually do offset-based > > checksum offload. > > > > bnx2 and tg3 cannot do offset-based checksumming because the hardware > doesn't have room in the buffer descriptors to specify the offsets. So > regrettably, the NETIF_F_HW_SUM flag has been misused in these drivers. > A new NETIF_F_IPV6_SUM flag will be very useful for us. Look furthur many drivers are just plain broken and use F_HW_SUM and can't even do IPV6 properly. I'll fix The worst code award goes to: qla3xxx.c which is broken on IPV6 and goes to trouble of computing all the offsets and they are already there in skb... -- Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
