From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 26 16:28:11 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FA8B990 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:28:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from seb@lineratesystems.com) Received: from mail-pa0-f54.google.com (mail-pa0-f54.google.com [209.85.220.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B72218FC12 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:28:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id bi1so2177787pad.13 for ; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:28:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=offb/mY6mDOHyxYFUZQScJgbO1DpoqpxZHSi7BASCuY=; b=B6/X0N77uxv9nB96SLs6nx+EpfvGtqnMNKxQjajB8CeH3gmqncPfSdX0gYxrGPPcaz umd8tG7INgP+sWHnDh3IgIQ0J6ogNBwTNzqVfelgusMFXbddsWLINxyNjRJ7vGNF9XET YDay2kn0vsIzwIGQ4F6S5N6zLuQ0Xk/xve7o5wO/KrDpe/mrGr8fbnFgLwECFzUONw5p 3jQ1m9yePoRAAoMCU/FyQQ0BEO+nIVF6QViZUmGLJjwAYoQuzAWj5ve7knNaTAQEoD9Y loPcNYD+4jaQYJAAwCIA3mqqxEahRU+Cu7ATNjcJmxdA+Dhpq/ZLa9GeQhv/zJudAYPo 5vCA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.69.0.10 with SMTP id au10mr71620882pbd.18.1351268890131; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.85.137 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:28:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20121026135354.GD70741@FreeBSD.org> References: <20121026135354.GD70741@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:28:10 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: fragmentation problem in FreeBSD 7 From: Sebastian Kuzminsky To: Gleb Smirnoff X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmsWfRW/Xgc8MNutl6gLbSx6pWEoNOr8zDHytiQ7L+Is566H+sLO6+x6xqbLOu8PoyxbAln Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 16:28:11 -0000 On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > Thanks for submission! > > I'm about to commit the attached patch to head. Can you please review it? > Haven't I missed anything important? > Looks good to me. Thanks for also including the sw_csum cleanup, that code had me scratching my head for a whole morning. :-) I have also moved from CSUM_DELAY_IP to CSUM_IP. AFAIU, the alias > CSUM_DELAY_IP > was made to match CSUM_DELAY_DATA. But to my point of view it makes it more > difficult to understand code, because a person reading code sees different > constants in the stack and in drivers. Since your change touches every line > in the stack, that utilizes CSUM_DELAY_IP, I decided to consistently use > CSUM_IP constant. > I agree with this. I did not understand why the original code use CSUM_DELAY_IP instead of the more obvious CSUM_IP, but i felt too timid to change it ;-) > Totus tuus, Glebius. > Et tuus, thanks for taking the time to review and clean up my patch! -- Sebastian Kuzminsky Linerate Systems