Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-29 Thread Alexander Duyck
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 4:29 PM, Michael Chan wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Alexander Duyck > wrote: > >> Okay so if that is the case we may want to make it so that we ignore >> checksum for both IPv4 and IPv6 and then we can just provide it via >> GSO_PARTIAL in the case we want it.

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-29 Thread Michael Chan
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:31 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote: > Okay so if that is the case we may want to make it so that we ignore > checksum for both IPv4 and IPv6 and then we can just provide it via > GSO_PARTIAL in the case we want it. Otherwise you are technically > mangling the frames by insert

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-29 Thread Alexander Duyck
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:29 PM, Michael Chan wrote: > On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Alexander Duyck > wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Michael Chan >> wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Alexander Duyck >>> wrote: On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Michael Chan

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-29 Thread Michael Chan
On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 2:17 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Michael Chan > wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Alexander Duyck >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Michael Chan >>> wrote: On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Alexander Duyck

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-29 Thread Alexander Duyck
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 9:32 PM, Michael Chan wrote: > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Alexander Duyck > wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Michael Chan >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Alexander Duyck >>> wrote: This patch assumes that the bnxt hardware will igno

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-27 Thread Michael Chan
On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Michael Chan > wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Alexander Duyck >> wrote: >>> This patch assumes that the bnxt hardware will ignore existing IPv4/v6 >>> header fields for length and checksum a

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-27 Thread Alexander Duyck
On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 10:55 PM, Michael Chan wrote: > On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote: >> This patch assumes that the bnxt hardware will ignore existing IPv4/v6 >> header fields for length and checksum as well as the length and checksum >> fields for outer UDP and GRE he

Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-26 Thread Michael Chan
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:06 PM, Alexander Duyck wrote: > This patch assumes that the bnxt hardware will ignore existing IPv4/v6 > header fields for length and checksum as well as the length and checksum > fields for outer UDP and GRE headers. > > I have no means of testing this as I do not have

[RFC PATCH 4/5] bnxt: Add support for segmentation of tunnels with outer checksums

2016-04-19 Thread Alexander Duyck
This patch assumes that the bnxt hardware will ignore existing IPv4/v6 header fields for length and checksum as well as the length and checksum fields for outer UDP and GRE headers. I have no means of testing this as I do not have any bnx2x hardware but thought I would submit it as an RFC to see i