Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:16:28 +0100
From:      "Bruce M. Simpson" <bms@FreeBSD.org>
To:        =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Marc_L=F6rner?= <marc.loerner@hob.de>
Cc:        Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Probable Bug in tcp.h
Message-ID:  <484D02FC.9090407@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200806091013.27813.marc.loerner@hob.de>
References:  <200806051712.47048.marc.loerner@hob.de>	<200806061025.37856.marc.loerner@hob.de>	<20080606221917.A16250@delplex.bde.org> <200806091013.27813.marc.loerner@hob.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marc L=F6rner wrote:
> off0 is 0x14 =3D> no problem with that
> but address of ip is 0xe000000021c8706e =3D> not correct aligned to 32-=
bits
>
> Can anyone tell me, where ip is allocated, so I can do a little bit mor=
e=20
> research?
>  =20

It really depends on the context! That's a very wide ranging question.

It depends upon whether mbuf chains are flowing up or down the stack,=20
whether or not the network driver supports checksum or header/segment=20
offload, and whether or not it is using zero-copy.

Zero copy transmit normally only has mmu cost if the mbuf (from=20
userland) can be mapped to a location where headers are easily=20
prepended. Zero copy receive is more expensive and complex as it=20
requires that the DMA engine on the network interface card supports=20
header splitting.

The FreeBSD stack is known to have some issues with mbuf alignment and=20
architectures other than those in its Tier 1.





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?484D02FC.9090407>