From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 20004 invoked from network); 11 Nov 2022 17:36:49 -0000 Received: from 9front.inri.net (168.235.81.73) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 11 Nov 2022 17:36:49 -0000 Received: from cc-smtpout1.netcologne.de ([89.1.8.211]) by 9front; Fri Nov 11 12:35:47 -0500 2022 Received: from cc-app2.netcologne.de (cc-app2.netcologne.de [89.1.9.191]) by cc-smtpout1.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A32312434 for <9front@9front.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 18:35:42 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=netcologne.de; s=nc1116a; t=1668188142; bh=96NqnTZniMcquXGMzSNlrV1Vm8awbdnR0CRj+Grxlic=; h=Date:From:To:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=foCsStcE+q/g9QmuZ2qvZJc4FuX+l15YtO4etPBrtGj5Al+xtqlWp2uMG4ZASlygV r+zlK486Ty3S5UIRP1gDuLY5HNx5NipqJeF4EyDtvpNR7PxPBAZ8b3qKi6jm+pDbyV P4pb9/YrniQ3EKA9Ej+reqPdaW5nikxWYjAPCHUfg4PlIJYBkM98CGWUuqF8PY3ULP fAz6JWbpd+ADIjOnSa4+wWRkTS+Y3Sl0sAGrjZ12yb8RbjgqX7lu3krlaC2Lf9EkmI ritL+w++YF6RPE4w/6i0A9fYiJ4FImZY7TdEKf+yjoN+x8zw2MSlcvv8a5bUlbEjba cTtMHv3QEg0jA== Received: from cc-app2.netcologne.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cc-app2.netcologne.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3D91511DCB for <9front@9front.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 18:35:42 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2022 18:35:42 +0100 (CET) From: Arne Meyer To: 9front@9front.org Message-ID: <1485335506.4596272.1668188142183@comcenter.netcologne.de> In-Reply-To: References: <1250188960.4593874.1668183193726@comcenter.netcologne.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.6-Rev16 X-Originating-IP: 2001:4dd6:4f82:0:871:1bcd:1671:77e4 X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite X-NetCologne-Spam: L X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 3D91511DCB X-Spamd-Bar: - List-ID: <9front.9front.org> List-Help: X-Glyph: ➈ X-Bullshit: patented plugin Subject: Re: [9front] [patch] ethervgbe: add rx checksum offloading Reply-To: 9front@9front.org Precedence: bulk To be honest, no. I was reading through the source code and found out that the ip stack supports RX checksum offloading, so i thought it was fun to implement it. The vgbe driver is my pet project. It's been in my local repo and kernel for about a week now and it didn't hurt. Blocks get send up the stack anyway, the only difference is that the code sets the flags for the blocks. Worst case scenario here is that the driver flags checksums as valid even when they are not. OpenBSD and FreeBSD both support it, so i think it's stable(ish). But as a fellow network admin, I somewhat agree with you. > hiro <23hiro@gmail.com> hat am 11.11.2022 17:01 GMT geschrieben: > > > did you find concrete use cases where it's worth offloading this? > some kind of actual bottleneck? > in practice one of my most frequent network administration related > tasks is to turn off all kinds of weird (broken) offloading features > on random ethernet cards. > > On 11/11/22, Arne Meyer wrote: > > Hello, > > > > this patch implements rx tcp and udp checksum offloading for ipv4 for the > > ethervgbe nic driver. > > > > Greetings, > > Arne