Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753320AbYLBAHi (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:07:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751529AbYLBAH0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:07:26 -0500 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:55273 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751068AbYLBAHZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:07:25 -0500 Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:07:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <20081201.160722.114600830.davem@davemloft.net> To: gallatin@myri.com Cc: ossthema@de.ibm.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tklein@de.ibm.com, raisch@de.ibm.com, jb.billaud@gmail.com, hering2@de.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] lro: IP fragment checking From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <49345CCA.1030209@myri.com> References: <493423D7.5030203@myri.com> <20081201.131810.158631503.davem@davemloft.net> <49345CCA.1030209@myri.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.1 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 537 Lines: 13 From: Andrew Gallatin Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:53:14 -0500 > What hardware does an explicit check for fragmentation? If the packet is fragmented, the chip shouldn't even be looking at the ports to make LRO deferral decisions let alone pass it down as a LRO'able frame. -- 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/