Bug 271371
| Summary: | e1000 driver falsely reports that it supports LRO | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Base System | Reporter: | Ed Maste <emaste> |
| Component: | kern | Assignee: | Kevin Bowling <kbowling> |
| Status: | Closed Not A Bug | ||
| Severity: | Affects Only Me | CC: | erj, kbowling |
| Priority: | --- | Keywords: | IntelNetworking |
| Version: | CURRENT | ||
| Hardware: | Any | ||
| OS: | Any | ||
| See Also: | https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=254596 | ||
I don't understand this bug? The IFCAP_LRO capability gets passed to iflib via the isc_capenable/isc_capabilities fields via the driver's if_softc_ctx_t object, then those are used in a if_setcapabilities/if_setcapenable() call in iflib when the driver loads. Then iflib sets up the lro context and handles sending packets via LRO's tcp_lro_rx() instead of the regular if_input() routine. iflib ends up handling most of it, but the driver still needs to set IFCAP_LRO if it wants iflib to use LRO. (In reply to Eric Joyner from comment #1) Agreed |
in sys/dev/e1000/if_em.c em and igb include IFCAP_LRO #define LEM_CAPS \ IFCAP_HWCSUM | IFCAP_VLAN_MTU | IFCAP_VLAN_HWTAGGING | \ IFCAP_VLAN_HWCSUM | IFCAP_WOL | IFCAP_VLAN_HWFILTER #define EM_CAPS \ IFCAP_HWCSUM | IFCAP_VLAN_MTU | IFCAP_VLAN_HWTAGGING | \ IFCAP_VLAN_HWCSUM | IFCAP_WOL | IFCAP_VLAN_HWFILTER | IFCAP_TSO4 | \ IFCAP_LRO | IFCAP_VLAN_HWTSO #define IGB_CAPS \ IFCAP_HWCSUM | IFCAP_VLAN_MTU | IFCAP_VLAN_HWTAGGING | \ IFCAP_VLAN_HWCSUM | IFCAP_WOL | IFCAP_VLAN_HWFILTER | IFCAP_TSO4 | \ IFCAP_LRO | IFCAP_VLAN_HWTSO | IFCAP_JUMBO_MTU | IFCAP_HWCSUM_IPV6 |\ IFCAP_TSO6 but there is no other reference to LRO in the driver, after f2d6ace4a684 which migrated lem/em/igb to iflib