Re: Dropping NETIF_F_SG since no checksum feature.

From: David Miller
Date: Wed Oct 11 2006 - 16:52:18 EST


From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 17:01:03 +0200

> Quoting Steven Whitehouse <steve@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> > > ssize_t tcp_sendpage(struct socket *sock, struct page *page, int offset,
> > > size_t size, int flags)
> > > {
> > > ssize_t res;
> > > struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
> > >
> > > if (!(sk->sk_route_caps & NETIF_F_SG) ||
> > > !(sk->sk_route_caps & NETIF_F_ALL_CSUM))
> > > return sock_no_sendpage(sock, page, offset, size, flags);
> > >
> > >
> > > So, it seems that if I set NETIF_F_SG but clear NETIF_F_ALL_CSUM,
> > > data will be copied over rather than sent directly.
> > > So why does dev.c have to force set NETIF_F_SG to off then?
> > >
> > I agree with that analysis,
>
> So, would you Ack something like the following then?

I certainly don't.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/