Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 04:14:12 -0000 From: Pyun YongHyeon <yongari@kt-is.co.kr> To: pf4freebsd@freelists.org Subject: [pf4freebsd] Re: pflogd patch: looking for non-i386 testers Message-ID: <20040831065105.GA5023@kt-is.co.kr> In-Reply-To: <200408302254.23353.max@love2party.net> References: <200408302254.23353.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Aug 30, 2004 at 10:54:15PM +0200, Max Laier wrote: > Hi, > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=bin/71096 > > slightly face-lifted patch at: > http://people.freebsd.org/~mlaier/pflogd.diff > > Please give it a try if you have non-i386 gear. I'd like to commit it as soon > as possible to put it in RELENG_5 as well ... so please - hurry ;) > It works on sparc64. And I think the kldload issue is correct since there is no pflog kernel module.(Of course kldxref(8) correctly handle this case, but it can confuse users.) BTW, I ecountered pf checksum error on hme(4). As you know, we already fixed byte-ordering issue in pf_check_proto_cksum(). And at that time, if my memory serve right, I tested the patch on hme(4).(I can't sure I enabled RX/TX checksum offloads on hme(4) though.) On latest 6-CURRENT, pf drops packet due to checksum error. If I disable RX checksum offload on hme(4) pf works OK. However, I don't think there is a problem in hme(4) since the hme works well on normal network stack. Any clues? Regards, Pyun YongHyeon -- Pyun YongHyeon <http://www.kr.freebsd.org/~yongari>;
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040831065105.GA5023>