Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 00:34:03 +0400 From: Andrey Zonov <andrey@zonov.org> To: pyunyh@gmail.com Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, davidch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bce: jumbo not working since r218423 Message-ID: <4FA6E03B.2000706@zonov.org> In-Reply-To: <20120427230400.GB17009@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <CANU_PUGwoLSrPcGE8wT=ga3-=F_n9qN4pPXMJC%2BH72wpS9Mfcw@mail.gmail.com> <20120427230400.GB17009@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 4/28/12 3:04 AM, YongHyeon PYUN wrote: > On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 03:23:19PM +0400, Andrey Zonov wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I found that jumbo frames don't work after r218423 with bce driver. >> This happens because controller doesn't do reinitialization when MTU >> is changed. Attached patch solves this problem. >> > > Could you verify whether attached diff addresses the issue? > Sorry, I couldn't setup my box yet due to some other reasons so the > diff was not tested. This patch also works. > >> I also don't understand why sysctl hw.bce.loose_rx_mtu doesn't respect >> with tunnable hw.bce.strict_rx_mtu. Is there any reason to give them >> different names? >> > > It may be an oversight. Personally I don't see any reason except > debugging purpose to limit RX frame size to interface MTU. It makes > sense when controller send frames but it should be able to receive > any sized RX frames(if controller allows it). Dropping RX frames > that are bigger than interface MTU would break path MTU discovery > of remote host that uses bigger MTU. I only mean different names for the same thing. -- Andrey Zonov
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4FA6E03B.2000706>