Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 7 Mar 2008 08:34:41 +0100
From:      Daniel Gerzo <danger@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com>
Cc:        Daniel Gerzo <danger@FreeBSD.org>, current@FreeBSD.org, yongari@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re[2]: re(4) problem
Message-ID:  <10310500019.20080307083441@rulez.sk>
In-Reply-To: <20080307043815.GA92464@cdnetworks.co.kr>
References:  <20080306200532.GA84961@cvsup.sk.freebsd.org> <20080307043815.GA92464@cdnetworks.co.kr>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Pyun,

Friday, March 7, 2008, 5:38:15 AM, you wrote:

> Checking Linux/NetBSD sources show interesting code which explictly
> enables IP checksum offload whenever TCP/UDP checksum offload is
> required(That's not documented in datasheet). I tried it on my box
> it seems to work but I need more feedback before committing it.
> Attached patch includes that change.

> Your report also indicates another possible bug but it's not clear
> to me. ENOBUFS from ping may indicate that re(4) got lost ink or
> re(4) thinks it lost the established link. When it happens did you
> ever check the output of ifconfig to see the media status of re(4)?

as I have included in my report, that media status reports that it's
active.

> I guess your issue is not related with bus_dma fixes but improper
> handling of link state. Try attached patch and let me know how it
> goes.

I have recompiled my kernel with the attached patch and I will report
if it's of any help.
BTW, it applied cleanly, but with some offsets, hope it's not problem.

-- 
Best regards,
 Daniel                            mailto:danger@FreeBSD.org




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?10310500019.20080307083441>