Home > Cannot Set > Cannot Set Device Udp Large Send Offload Settings

Cannot Set Device Udp Large Send Offload Settings

I then tried to show all the offload parameters by running /usr/sbin/ethtool -k eth0 I got the following response: Offload parameters for eth0: Cannot get device rx csum settings: Operation not Instead of receiving a control packet returning coalesced credit returns, you'll have one per sent packet. From what I have seen, what the card can do my be quite different than what my installed OS can do. You can not post a blank message.

HP Z1 Workstation Revealed - The Power without the... Divy, can you confirm? EU wants Europe to be supercomputing superpower How to replace failed disk on N-Series Filer Using Kernel Samepage Merging with KVM ld cannot find -lmkl_intel_ilp64.a How to fix a broken yum This would certainly still be a problem in that environment.

Comment 11 Divy Le Ray 2009-07-08 00:48:55 EDT Created attachment 350893 [details] Tx credit return management for Dom0's Xen Hi Andy, We've not done much Xen testing in RHEL context. Search this Thread 07-27-2011, 07:25 AM #1 JonasKunze LQ Newbie Registered: Jul 2011 Posts: 3 Rep: UDP vs TCP and tcp offload issues Hey folks, I have two PCs On the host, disable the tx assist using ethtool (ethtool -K ethX tx off) 4) Repeat step#2, compare results of step#2, and step#4 Actual results: 44 Mb/sec Expected results: ~5000Mb/sec Additional Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org?

I am actually interested in generating a UDP header per packet, as my packets are all < MTU. The kernel will also need a modification to add a new NETIF_F flag to indicate the hardware can segment UDP frames with TSO style. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.

Re: Proper settings for disabling Offloading. More pressure on the pci bus, on the FW. Here are some which I use more often. Cheers, Divy Comment 16 Herbert Xu 2009-10-29 14:24:19 EDT FWIW I'm experimenting with a new TX interrupt mitigation mechanism that will hopefully resolve this problem without creating a different path for

Re: Proper settings for disabling Offloading. Why would TX be off but not RX. Is it even possible to use UDP Fragmentation/Segmentation offload? However, after rebooting the server (doing this on a non-production machine to make sure the rules are correct), running ethtool -k eth0 shows:[root@hostname rules.d]# ethtool -k eth0 | grep "tcp segmentation"Cannot

This report is therefore being closed with a resolution of ERRATA. I guess I'd run wireshark on some packets to see if the checksum is wrong. Using Torque to set up a Queue to direct users to ... So my next decision was to disable tcp offload to get some comparable results (meaning the CPU load should rise to 100% for tcp too).

Notices Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community. Contact Us - Advertising Info - Rules - LQ Merchandise - Donations - Contributing Member - LQ Sitemap - Main Menu Linux Forum Android Forum Chrome OS Forum Search LQ Visit the following links: Site Howto | Site FAQ | Sitemap | Register Now If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. And what about using KVM?

So I checked the offload state by following: # ethtool -k eth5 Offload parameters for eth5: rx-checksumming: on tx-checksumming: on scatter-gather: on tcp-segmentation-offload: on udp-fragmentation-offload: off generic-segmentation-offload: on generic-receive-offload: on large-receive-offload: My first results showed me that with both protocols the speed is quite comparable as long as you aren't using jumbo frames. Do you have any thoughts about trying to add a tx-completion interrupt to try and address this? for reference, UFO is for other vendor's hardware that can generate a packet stream like: input to driver skb > MTU size with UDP header output from hardware UDP packet with

NIC: Broadcom BCM 5719 (is on the HCL) Command: xe bond-create network-uuid=595b691f-a802-f8d7-0ef7-18402908c062 pif-uuids=2b15a857-2e6c-65bb-6215-f35783a5afb7,397ba528-070a-7360-5484-04d2f449324a Error-Msg: An unknown error occurred while attempting to configure an interface. Like Show 0 Likes (0) Actions 2. Comment 10 Andy Gospodarek 2009-07-06 16:49:50 EDT Divy, have you done much testing with Xen?

Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.

We do not have software support currently for TSO of udp packets, I think that it should work and have prototyped some code for other adapters to test out this feature. Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free. We have hit such a performance > degradation. Aakash ,VCA -DCV/WM/Cloud,VCP-DCV 4/5,VCAP-DCA 4 | vExpert 2014 Mark my post as "helpful" or "correct" if I've helped resolve or answered your query!

Good to know, Herbert. /me needs some Xen and KVM lessons. :-) Comment 15 Divy Le Ray 2009-07-09 00:36:55 EDT Hi Andy, Making these changes permanent would have an impact on Comment 21 Paolo Bonzini 2010-06-23 18:55:09 EDT Just like it should not be a problem for KVM it shouldn't be a problem also for PCI passthrough to Xen HVM guests. Comment 18 Paolo Bonzini 2010-06-23 12:40:31 EDT Herbert, should we go with Divy's patch or wait for your stuff to be complete? However, the "Operation not supported" messages indicates that your ethernet device does not seem to handle TCP checksumming and other offloading features.

I also need to get up to speed on KVM. Aakash Jacob Oct 31, 2012 2:36 PM (in response to PDXPaulee) Hi Paul To disable the TCP Segmentation Offload:ethtool -K eth# tso offConfiguring flow control using ethtoolSome network drivers allow you Herbert/Divy, would they need it?