Hi Matthew,
2015-01-05 21:25, Matthew Hall:
> > > 2) The checksum operations are kind of a hodgepodge and don't always have
> > > a
> > > consistent vision to them... some things like the 16-bit-based IP checksum
> > > appear to be missing any routine, including any accelerated one when the
> >
On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 09:25:37PM -0800, Matthew Hall wrote:
> The same computation algorithm must be reused to calculate the IPV6
> Pseudoheader checksum when generating ICMPV6, UDPV6, and other L4 protocols
> whose definitions were retroactively modified to include the IPV6
> pseudoheader,
On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 09:36:54AM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> Which checksum are you talking about? IPv6 checsum doesn't exist.
The same computation algorithm must be reused to calculate the IPV6
Pseudoheader checksum when generating ICMPV6, UDPV6, and other L4 protocols
whose definitions
Hello All,
I noticed that in version 1.8, there are no flags to indicate IPv6 check
sum offloading
(only DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM)
which means TSO offloading is also not supported for IPv6.
Are there any plans/road map to support this?
Thanks
Gal.
Hi Gal and Matthew,
2015-01-05 00:09, Matthew Hall:
> On Jan 4, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Gal Sagie wrote:
> > I noticed that in version 1.8, there are no flags to indicate IPv6 check
> > sum offloading
> > (only DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM)
> > which means TSO offloading is also not supported for IPv6.
Hello,
On 01/05/2015 08:56 AM, Gal Sagie wrote:
> I noticed that in version 1.8, there are no flags to indicate IPv6 check
> sum offloading
> (only DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM)
There is no L3 checksum field in IPv6 header, that's why there is no
DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV6_CKSUM flag.
> which means TSO
On Jan 4, 2015, at 11:56 PM, Gal Sagie wrote:
> I noticed that in version 1.8, there are no flags to indicate IPv6 check
> sum offloading
> (only DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM)
> which means TSO offloading is also not supported for IPv6.
I need that feature too. Right now I disabled the IP checksum
7 matches
Mail list logo
