>> Hi, Alexander
>>>>
>>>> On 2017/12/21 0:24, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Yunsheng Lin
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi, all
>>>>>> I have some doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(
>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Yunsheng Lin
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Hi, all
>>>>> I have some doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic when
>>>>> analyzing the tcpv4 gro process:
>>>>>
>>>>> Firstly
Hi, Alexander
On 2017/12/22 0:29, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 1:16 AM, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>> Hi, Alexander
>>
>> On 2017/12/21 0:24, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Yunsheng Lin
>>> wrote:
>>&g
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 1:16 AM, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> Hi, Alexander
>
> On 2017/12/21 0:24, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>>> Hi, all
>>> I have some doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic when
Hi, Alexander
On 2017/12/21 0:24, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>> Hi, all
>> I have some doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic when
>> analyzing the tcpv4 gro process:
>>
>> Firstly we set
On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
> Hi, all
> I have some doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic when
> analyzing the tcpv4 gro process:
>
> Firstly we set NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic to 1 in dev_gro_receive:
> https://elixir.free-electrons.co
Hi, all
I have some doubt about NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic when
analyzing the tcpv4 gro process:
Firstly we set NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_atomic to 1 in dev_gro_receive:
https://elixir.free-electrons.com/linux/v4.15-rc4/source/net/core/dev.c#L4838
And then in inet_gro_receive, we che
Folks
I have a doubt about the behaviour of a Linux IPv4 raw socket, with the
IP_HDRINCL option set, rejecting a packet bigger than the outgoing interface’s
MTU size with EMSGSIZE. Please take a look at the following and let me know if
I should make a kernel code change to remove this
Hello Auke,
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 10:41 -0800, Kok, Auke wrote:
> > Even hw structure has not been used, why it has been passed into
> > e1000_io_write function?
>
> 2.6.12.3? why do you care? that code is probably long gone... was that
> function
> even used?
I noticed that this also happens o
Jeba Anandhan wrote:
> Hi all,
> i have doubt in e1000_io_write().
>
> void
> e1000_io_write(struct e1000_hw *hw, unsigned long port, uint32_t value)
> {
> outl(value, port);
> }
>
>
> kernel version: 2.6.12.3
>
>
> Even hw structure has
Hi all,
i have doubt in e1000_io_write().
void
e1000_io_write(struct e1000_hw *hw, unsigned long port, uint32_t value)
{
outl(value, port);
}
kernel version: 2.6.12.3
Even hw structure has not been used, why it has been passed into
e1000_io_write function?
Thanks
Jeba
--
To
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 18:50:59 -0700
> On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 18:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
> David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > I don't think it's %100 right, I'm referring specifically to
> >
> > e68a8c10c4c5daf363e946d10c1a5cba77d7f92c
> >
> >
On Sun, 03 Jun 2007 18:00:51 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I don't think it's %100 right, I'm referring specifically to
>
> e68a8c10c4c5daf363e946d10c1a5cba77d7f92c
>
> Sure, qla3xxx is only handling ipv4 in that ql_hw_csum_setup()
> function, but if you check the call
I don't think it's %100 right, I'm referring specifically to
e68a8c10c4c5daf363e946d10c1a5cba77d7f92c
Sure, qla3xxx is only handling ipv4 in that ql_hw_csum_setup()
function, but if you check the call site it really wants
CHECKSUM_PARTIAL skb's to work on. And CHECKSUM_PARTIAL skbs are only
set
Hi,
I am facing a problem when I run tc on the bonded nic cards.
When I run tc on a single nic card, it worked perfectly fine. But when I
run tc on a bond of two nics, tc gives poor performance. The two nics
were bonded in round-robin (load balancing) mode. I created a qdisc, class
and a fil
hi all,
The transmit functions of ethernet drivers (dev->hard_start_xmit) are
protected to prevent multiple execution of transmits going in parallel. The
general scheme used by most of driver is :
1. Reset NETIF_F_LLTX flag in dev->features and then use kernel locking given
through HARD_TX_LOC
Hi all,
Ive been trying to understand iptables kernel code and
basically how it functions. In doing so i have a few questions.
In the file ip_tables.c there is call do_replace() which
is used as the start point entry from sockopt.
That is this gets called
> can any1 point me to a good linux memory management stuff. Actually i
> want to know the conversion of virtual to physical address and when u
> need to do it.
The DMA chapter of LDD3 covers this topic in detail:
http://lwn.net/Kernel/LDD3/
jon
Jonathan Corbet
Executive editor, LWN.net
On Fri, Aug 12, 2005 at 09:33:13AM +0530, varun ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a major doubt regarding how to generate my own icmp
> packet from the kernel space. That is iam aware of raw sockets and
> packet sockets but thats from user space. I want o
19 matches
Mail list logo
