From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 13:40:14 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 13:40:04 -0500 Received: from minus.inr.ac.ru ([193.233.7.97]:20488 "HELO ms2.inr.ac.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sat, 27 Jan 2001 13:39:57 -0500 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200101271839.VAA02790@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: [UPDATE] Zerocopy patches, against 2.4.1-pre10 To: ionut@cs.columbia.edu (Ion Badulescu) Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 21:39:44 +0300 (MSK) Cc: davem@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: from "Ion Badulescu" at Jan 26, 1 04:55:05 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! > verify this? The only way I can think of is to verify that the checksum > field is zero initially, correct? It is not zero. It contains checksum of pseudoheader. > fits the new Linux model a bit better, as it has one descriptor per > packet, not one per fragment (like the current implementation). Yes. Absence of such mode with acenic is big pain in ass. > tinygrams. A TCP packet whose second fragment is 1-byte long usually goes > over the wire with the wrong checksum. If the second fragment is 3-byte > long, it is checksummed correctly (so it's not an even/odd problem). Seems, this is pretty common bug. At least, perfect checksumming of chunks with any size and alignment is so big boast of alteon people, that it is clearly rather exception than rule. 8)8) I think you have to check for wrong combination of alignment/size and to call skb_checksum_help() and to disable checksumming if combination is bad. Alexey - 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/