From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Du, Fan" Subject: RE: [PATCH net] gso: do GSO for local skb with size bigger than MTU Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 06:53:08 +0000 Message-ID: <5A90DA2E42F8AE43BC4A093BF0678848DEE22D@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <5A90DA2E42F8AE43BC4A093BF0678848DEE09A@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20141202.203511.1346917579566370675.davem@davemloft.net> <5A90DA2E42F8AE43BC4A093BF0678848DEE0DC@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20141202.211449.2074426768363313524.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "fw@strlen.de" , "Du, Fan" To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:25840 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750896AbaLCGz5 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2014 01:55:57 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20141202.211449.2074426768363313524.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >-----Original Message----- >From: David Miller [mailto:davem@davemloft.net] >Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 1:15 PM >To: Du, Fan >Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; fw@strlen.de >Subject: Re: [PATCH net] gso: do GSO for local skb with size bigger than MTU > >From: "Du, Fan" >Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 04:50:21 +0000 > >> Do you have any better idea to achieve what you said besides this >> patch approach without both fragmentation and ICMP message at the same >> time to cater for all kinds tunnel tech? > >I am not obligated to figure out for you how to design a correctly implemented >patch. > >But I am obligated to keep a bad change from going into the tree and that is what I >am doing. "bad" is not depending whether you say it or not, but what the real world needs and what proper solution could be provided at the time being.