From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: [PATCH] sky2: don't do GRO on second port Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 12:53:26 +0000 Message-ID: <20100902125326.GD8775@ff.dom.local> References: <20100830.095012.233695092.davem@davemloft.net> <20100830105117.0f0cf140@nehalam> <20100830190900.GA3141@del.dom.local> <20100901.145151.93454549.davem@davemloft.net> <20100901145554.4f5abd80@nehalam> <20100902091839.GB6246@ff.dom.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , eric.dumazet@gmail.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:38863 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753027Ab0IBMxf (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Sep 2010 08:53:35 -0400 Received: by bwz11 with SMTP id 11so521804bwz.19 for ; Thu, 02 Sep 2010 05:53:34 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100902091839.GB6246@ff.dom.local> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 09:18:39AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote: > On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 02:55:54PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 14:51:51 -0700 (PDT) > > David Miller wrote: > > > > > From: Jarek Poplawski > > > Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 21:09:00 +0200 > > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:51:17AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > >> > > > >> There's something very important I forgot to tell you. > > > >> What? > > > >> > > > >> Don't cross the GRO streams. > > > >> Why? > > > >> > > > >> It would be bad. > > > >> I'm fuzzy on the whole good/bad thing. What do you mean, "bad"? > > > >> > > > >> Try to imagine all the Internet as you know it stopping instantaneously > > > >> and every bit in every packet swapping at the speed of light. > > > >> Total packet reordering. > > > >> Right. That's bad. Okay. All right. Important safety tip. Thanks, Hubert > > > > > > > > Looks really bad to me, so... let's forget it! ;-) (At least until > > > > next next.) > > > > The patch wasn't that bad, but the movie quote probably confused you. > > Yes, I was equally confused by both of them. Good to know it's only > fiction... ;-) Stephen, after Eric's explanation, I really think this patch was a bad idea, and I apologize my false opinion started this. I hope David, will revert this patch, please. Sorry, Jarek P.