| /linux/drivers/net/ |
| H A D | loopback.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| /linux/net/bridge/ |
| H A D | br_forward.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| /linux/net/ipv4/ |
| H A D | ip_output.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| H A D | tcp_output.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| H A D | tcp.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| H A D | tcp_input.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| /linux/net/ipv6/ |
| H A D | ip6_output.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| /linux/include/net/ |
| H A D | tcp.h | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| /linux/include/linux/ |
| H A D | skbuff.h | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| H A D | netdevice.h | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|
| /linux/net/core/ |
| H A D | skbuff.c | diff 7967168cefdbc63bf332d6b1548eca7cd65ebbcc Thu Jun 22 11:40:14 CEST 2006 Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> [NET]: Merge TSO/UFO fields in sk_buff
Having separate fields in sk_buff for TSO/UFO (tso_size/ufo_size) is not
going to scale if we add any more segmentation methods (e.g., DCCP). So
let's merge them.
They were used to tell the protocol of a packet. This function has been
subsumed by the new gso_type field. This is essentially a set of netdev
feature bits (shifted by 16 bits) that are required to process a specific
skb. As such it's easy to tell whether a given device can process a GSO
skb: you just have to and the gso_type field and the netdev's features
field.
I've made gso_type a conjunction. The idea is that you have a base type
(e.g., SKB_GSO_TCPV4) that can be modified further to support new features.
For example, if we add a hardware TSO type that supports ECN, they would
declare NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_TSO_ECN. All TSO packets with CWR set would
have a gso_type of SKB_GSO_TCPV4 | SKB_GSO_TCPV4_ECN while all other TSO
packets would be SKB_GSO_TCPV4. This means that only the CWR packets need
to be emulated in software.
Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
|