Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 11:18:18 +0100 From: Ben Gray <ben.r.gray@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Test tools for new network driver Message-ID: <17D3FAD0-1372-45BA-B4A1-02840B925F1F@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1313806260.2814.57.camel@deadeye> References: <4E4E3522.6030207@gmail.com> <1313806260.2814.57.camel@deadeye>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks everyone, Cheers for the tips on the mac address, I must admit I wasn't aware of the= locally assigned bit in the address. As for H/W checksum offloading, the main problem is the datasheet for the= chip is under NDA which I'm unwilling to sign, so I'm working off the Linux= driver. It seems under Linux if the TCP/UDP checksum fails it reverts to a s= oftware calculation and as far as I can tell FreeBSD doesn't do this. Hence i= t seems under Linux the driver reports incorrect csums but the kernel covers= up for it. And thanks for the tips on network test tools, I'll check 'em it. I was hopi= ng there was a nice FOSS test tool. Thanks, Ben On 20 Aug 2011, at 03:11, Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2011-08-19 at 11:04 +0100, Ben Gray wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> I'm not sure if this the right list to post to, but here goes ... >>=20 >> I'm currently writing a driver for the SMSC LAN95xx range of USB to=20= >> Ethernet adapter chips=20 >> (http://www.smsc.com/index.php?tid=3D300&pid=3D135&tab=3D1). The basic RX= /TX=20 >> works and now I'm trying to get the H/W checksum offload working,=20 >> however I've come across some problems with the H/W implementation, e.g.=20= >> it doesn't work with small (<64 byte) packets. >>=20 >> So I was wondering if anyone knows of any test tools I can use to=20 >> fire all the different unusual sort of packets at the interface to see=20= >> how the H/W csum reacts, i.e. runt packets, packets with IP options,=20 >> IPv6 packets with extension headers, etc. >=20 > There are various commercial tools and test suites, and I would expect > that most vendors of network controllers and IP blocks have their own > test suites that attempt to cover this. I know Solarflare has used > tools from Oktet Labs (see <http://www.oktetlabs.ru/test_env.rhtml>) > among others. >=20 >> Another question I had was; is there a kernel function to generate=20= >> a random MAC address ? Or is there a FreeBSD (or FOSS equivalent)=20 >> Ethernet manufacturer ID I could use for randomly generated MAC addresses= ? > [...] >=20 > You can use any (almost) any address with byte 0 bit 0 cleared (not > multicast) and byte 0 bit 1 set (locally assigned). I don't know > whether FreeBSD has a function for this, but Linux has one which just > gets 6 random bytes and then changes the first byte to conform to this. >=20 > There are a small number of old OUIs which should be avoided; see > <http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/195545>. >=20 > Ben. >=20 > --=20 > Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare > Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. > They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. >=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17D3FAD0-1372-45BA-B4A1-02840B925F1F>