Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:10:39 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/4] Add ETHTOOL_[GS]FLAGS sub-ioctls | From | David Miller <> |
| |
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 14:11:24 -0700
> Jeff Garzik wrote: > > > This patch copies Auke in adding NETIF_F_LRO. Is that just for > > temporary merging, or does the net core really not touch it at all? > > > > Because, logically, if NETIF_F_LRO exists nowhere else but this patch, > > we should not add it to dev->features. LRO knowledge can be contained > > entirely within the driver, if the net core never tests NETIF_F_LRO. > > > > I haven't reviewed the other NETIF_F_XXX flags, but, that logic can be > > applied to any other NETIF_F_XXX flag: if the net stack isn't using it, > > it's a piece of information specific to that driver. > > I believe LRO is going to have to be disabled for routing/bridging, > so the stack will probably need to become aware of it at some point...
The packet will be GSO'd on output I believe, so it won't break anything.
Alternatively, we could make the driver only LRO accumulate if the packet is unicast and matches one of the MAC's programmed into the chip. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |