I plan to fix this together with supporting LSO on VNICs, since there
are some relevant work to do together.
Yes, the CR 6762622 is really confusing. The original file CR was
tracking a performance issue, but finally the submitter changed the
synopsis to the current one to track the snoop display problem for LSO
packets. I'll update the CR shortly. Sorry for the confusions.
The simplest way to fix the CR is let snoop to check the LSO information
with the packet and avoid warning it. But I'm not sure it's enough.
Since LSO packets will be segmented by the NIC hardware so on the wire
there are only MTU-size packets. Are there suers who expect to have a
option for snoop to see the "expected packets on the wire"? For example,
`snoop -?` to parse the LSO packet header to multiple regular headers
that are expected to be seen on the wire?
It gets a little bit complex when we implement LSO on top of VNICs, as
is still being discussed. When snooping a VNIC created on e1000g, should
the snoops be seeing original LSO packets as sent to e1000g or
post-segmentation packets as seen on the wire? Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Roamer
Peter Memishian wrote:
> > > Snoop issues a pile of warnings when run on an LSO-enabled NIC:
> > >
> > > (warning) packet length greater than MTU in buffer offset 7384: length=3000
> >
> > 6762622; Roamer Lu is the RE but I'm not sure if he's working on it.
> >
>
> I don't think so; 6762622 is about the "(warning) bad packet header in
> buffer offset 61460: length=0" errors; it explicitly says that
> "(warning) packet length greater than MTU" is expected with LSO, and
> will be the subject of a different bug (but there's nothing in the See
> Also to indicate that other bug).
>
> It's a confusing bug, but that's what I got from multiple readings.
Roamer, can you clarify?
--
# telnet (650)-786-6759 (x86759)
Connected to Solaris.Sun.COM.
login: Lu, Yunsong
Last login: January 2, 2007 from beyond.sfbay
[email protected] v1.04 Since Mon Dec. 22, 2003
[roa...@solaris Networking]# cd ..
_______________________________________________
networking-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
