From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 22 09:50:44 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2938A16A401 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:50:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sepherosa@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.173]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B802B13C4A5 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:50:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sepherosa@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id o2so933614uge for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 01:50:42 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Ucwkfwc9O+aVj+bR9LAPzLJb+mLrrPubOCntOnhSx5WIRquxJLNbgvlLWLFYsb+YpMNuJ7pHxNcRkbZelDZmkO+CFWDnjAwNtqbZ3HXSqvVjjqOtQ6IxnsVNGCKDg/iDayZUecBZOu9pmwbqMDPr9uDHOdBJ5RMlUVdoDjC0FWQ= Received: by 10.82.114.3 with SMTP id m3mr4414957buc.1169457894692; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 01:24:54 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.78.130.18 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Jan 2007 01:24:54 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 17:24:54 +0800 From: "Sepherosa Ziehau" To: pyunyh@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <20070122073611.GC29223@cdnetworks.co.kr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070122073611.GC29223@cdnetworks.co.kr> Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for re(4) checksum offload testers. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:50:44 -0000 On 1/22/07, Pyun YongHyeon wrote: > Hi, > > It seems that some revisions of re(4) hardwares(PCIe variants?) still > have Tx checksum offload issues. One user reported the issue said > the attached patch fixed the issue on his box. -#define RL_MIN_FRAMELEN 60 +/* + * re(4) hardware IPv4 Tx checksum offload could be mangled with 28 bytes + * or less IP packets. + */ +#define RL_TXCSUM_MINLEN 28 +#define RL_MIN_FRAMELEN (ETHER_HDR_LEN + RL_TXCSUM_MINLEN) Does you patch mean a buggy PCIe re(4) will trash small packets padded to 60bytes but will not trash small packets padded to 42bytes? If "yes" is the answer, then why normal packets whose size is 60bytes will not be trashed by a buggy PCIe re(4)? IMHO, "fixing buggy PCIe re(4) txcsum" is not NetBSD's original intention to narrow down the size of packets that will trigger the re(4) txcsum bug. Best Regards, sephe -- Live Free or Die