Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:29:23 +0900 From: Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com> To: Thomas Lotterer <thomas+freebsd@lotterer.net> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: suspect bug in vge(4) Message-ID: <20090611002923.GA68519@michelle.cdnetworks.co.kr> In-Reply-To: <4A2FF8E3.4060501@lotterer.net> References: <4A2DA8D9.2030300@lotterer.net> <20090610024959.GD63941@michelle.cdnetworks.co.kr> <4A2FF8E3.4060501@lotterer.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 08:18:11PM +0200, Thomas Lotterer wrote: > Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > >I already know there are possible edge-cases in vge(4) but your > >issue looks quite different one than ever reported. Unfortunately > >vge(4) hardware I had was broken so I couldn't complete overhauling > >the vge(4). The code in the following URL is the latest WIP version > >but I don't know whether it fixes the issue as it wasn't tested at > >all on real hardware. > >http://people.freebsd.org/~yongari/vge/if_vge.c > >http://people.freebsd.org/~yongari/vge/if_vgereg.h > >http://people.freebsd.org/~yongari/vge/if_vgevar.h > > > These files contain a CVS Id dating them 2007-11-22 while CURRENT has > 2009-05-30. Assuming these dates are reliable this means the patches are > roughly 19 months old and AFAIK 1000BaseTX support was added within the > last 6 months. I do not believe reverting back makes sense, if you know > better, please tell me. > You can ignore the date. The cvs id was there as I wanted to know which was the base revision when I started working on vge(4). > There is another interesting patch aside which deals with TXCSUM > http://people.freebsd.org/~yongari/vge/vge.csum.patch > However, it is already included in CURRENT. > > More ideas? As you said the checksum patch already committed and I believe it has no relation with your issue.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090611002923.GA68519>