On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 2:23 AM, Hefty, Sean sean.he...@intel.com wrote:
I don't think we should over-complex things vs. what the network stack
does for many (since kernel 2.4?!) years. They have basically three
flags
NETIF_F_IP_CSUM - device can checksum TCP/UDP over IPv4
NETIF_F_IP6_CSUM -
On Wednesday, August 5, 2015 8:16 PM, Jason Gunthorpe
jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 06:34:26PM +0300, Amir Vadai wrote:
struct ib_uverbs_ex_query_device {
__u32 comp_mask;
+ __u32 csum_caps;
__u32 reserved;
};
Uh no.
This is the struct
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Haggai Eran hagg...@mellanox.com wrote:
On Wednesday, August 5, 2015 8:16 PM, Jason Gunthorpe
jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 06:34:26PM +0300, Amir Vadai wrote:
struct ib_uverbs_ex_query_device {
__u32 comp_mask;
+
On 08/06/2015 02:18 PM, Parav Pandit wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Haggai Eran hagg...@mellanox.com
mailto:hagg...@mellanox.com wrote:
On Wednesday, August 5, 2015 8:16 PM, Jason Gunthorpe
jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com
mailto:jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Haggai Eran hagg...@mellanox.com wrote:
On 08/06/2015 02:18 PM, Parav Pandit wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Haggai Eran hagg...@mellanox.com
mailto:hagg...@mellanox.com wrote:
On Wednesday, August 5, 2015 8:16 PM, Jason Gunthorpe
On Thu, Aug 6, 2015 at 3:00 AM, Jason Gunthorpe
jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com wrote:
[...]
The participating we are sorely lacking right now is on the review
side, which is like most of the kernel, unfortunately.
I agree, if a proper internal review was taking place here, it
wouldn't been
+enum ib_csum_cap_flags {
+ IB_CSUM_RX_TCP_UDP = 1 0,
+ IB_CSUM_RX_IP_HDR= 1 1,
+ IB_CSUM_TX_TCP_UDP = 1 2,
+ IB_CSUM_TX_IP_HDR= 1 3
+};
TPC and UDP should be separate flags.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
+enum ib_csum_cap_flags {
+ IB_CSUM_RX_TCP_UDP = 1 0,
+ IB_CSUM_RX_IP_HDR= 1 1,
+ IB_CSUM_TX_TCP_UDP = 1 2,
+ IB_CSUM_TX_IP_HDR= 1 3
+};
TPC and UDP should be separate flags.
Can you explain why?
For the same reason that you didn't include
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 06:34:26PM +0300, Amir Vadai wrote:
struct ib_uverbs_ex_query_device {
__u32 comp_mask;
+ __u32 csum_caps;
__u32 reserved;
};
Uh no.
@@ -221,6 +222,7 @@ struct ib_uverbs_odp_caps {
struct ib_uverbs_ex_query_device_resp {
struct
+enum ib_csum_cap_flags {
+ IB_CSUM_RX_TCP_UDP = 1 0,
+ IB_CSUM_RX_IP_HDR= 1 1,
+ IB_CSUM_TX_TCP_UDP = 1 2,
+ IB_CSUM_TX_IP_HDR= 1 3
+};
TPC and UDP should be separate flags.
Can you explain why?
What we are advertising here is offloads for
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Jason Gunthorpe
jguntho...@obsidianresearch.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 06:34:26PM +0300, Amir Vadai wrote:
struct ib_uverbs_ex_query_device {
__u32 comp_mask;
+ __u32 csum_caps;
__u32 reserved;
};
Uh no.
@@ -221,6 +222,7 @@ struct
On Thu, Aug 06, 2015 at 01:16:17AM +0300, Or Gerlitz wrote:
So -- shit happens, I am trying to figure out if an internal review
has been done, b/c we do have some folks who terribly master the
extended uverbs framework, right...?
You and Matan had no problem doing the timestamp stuff properly
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Hefty, Sean sean.he...@intel.com wrote:
TPC and UDP should be separate flags.
Sean,
I don't think we should over-complex things vs. what the network stack
does for many (since kernel 2.4?!) years. They have basically three
flags
NETIF_F_IP_CSUM - device can
13 matches
Mail list logo
