From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 05:42:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 05:42:04 -0500 Received: from chiara.elte.hu ([157.181.150.200]:55309 "HELO chiara.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 11 Jan 2001 05:41:53 -0500 Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2001 11:41:30 +0100 (CET) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: To: "David S. Miller" Cc: , , Subject: Re: Updated zerocopy patch up on kernel.org In-Reply-To: <200101100120.RAA07805@pizda.ninka.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 9 Jan 2001, David S. Miller wrote: > Is there any value to supporting fragments in a driver which > doesn't do hardware checksumming? IIRC Alexey had a patch to do > such for Tulip, but I don't see it in the above patchset. > > I'm actually considering making the SG w/o hwcsum situation illegal. i believe it might still make some limited sense for normal sendmsg() and higher MTUs (or 8k NFS) - we could copy & checksum stuff into the ->tcp_page if SG is possible and thus the SG capability improves the VM. (because we can allocate at PAGE_SIZE granularity.) Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/