From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri May 26 11:30:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31A3A16A466 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 11:30:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from www.ebusiness-leidinger.de (jojo.ms-net.de [84.16.236.246]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC41943D62 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 11:30:42 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (p54A5FC6A.dip.t-dialin.net [84.165.252.106]) (authenticated bits=0) by www.ebusiness-leidinger.de (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k4QBHqFn049843; Fri, 26 May 2006 13:17:54 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Received: from Magellan.Leidinger.net (Magellan.Leidinger.net [192.168.1.1]) by Andro-Beta.Leidinger.net (8.13.4/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k4QBUGD2004878; Fri, 26 May 2006 13:30:16 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from Alexander@Leidinger.net) Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 13:30:17 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger To: Andrew Gallatin Message-ID: <20060526133017.224cff08@Magellan.Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <17525.55617.272397.806798@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> References: <20060524180802.GA59176@central.0xfce3.net> <200605250517.12054.max@love2party.net> <20060525104000.GA4962@central.0xfce3.net> <20060525115447.GB724@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <17525.55617.272397.806798@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.2.0 (GTK+ 2.8.17; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new Cc: Peter Jeremy , freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Max Laier , Gordon Bergling Subject: Re: Take 2: new IP Checksum Code from DragonFlyBSD 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: Fri, 26 May 2006 11:30:51 -0000 Quoting Andrew Gallatin (Thu, 25 May 2006 12:20:17 -0400 (EDT)): > If we're going to do anything, I'd prefer to see us skip > the checksum on everything sent across lo0 and stick with > the slower, yet known to work, existing checksum code for > slow interfaces. The current code is known to work with the current gcc we use. It is known to *not* work with the Intel C compiler. It may or may not work with an upcomming gcc version. The current code is a maze of assembly and macros, the new one is straight forward C and a little bit of assembly. And the new one is also known to work in DragonFlyBSD. Do you expect *this* code to act differently between FreeBSD and DragonFlyBSD? What's the technical backing of your preference to stick with the current code? How does the technical backing of your preference compare to the technical arguments I presented in this thread regarding the priority of the arguments? Bye, Alexander. -- Selling GoodYear Eagle F1 235/40ZR18, 2x 4mm + 2x 5mm, ~150 EUR you have to pick it up between Germany/Saarland and Luxembourg/Capellen http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137