Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 15:45:17 +0200 From: Danny Braniss <danny@cs.huji.ac.il> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Peter Jeremy <peter@vk2pj.dyndns.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: impossible packet length ... Message-ID: <E1LW9yH-0003Xm-KS@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902081318000.89719@fledge.watson.org> References: <E1LW5Ht-0000VH-D8@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <20090208091656.GA31876@test71.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <E1LW60v-0000zC-B2@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <20090208104253.GB31876@test71.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902081252300.1129@fledge.watson.org> <E1LW9WA-0003Fu-O4@kabab.cs.huji.ac.il> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902081318000.89719@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > On Sun, 8 Feb 2009, Danny Braniss wrote: > > > looking at the bce source, it's not clear (to me :-). If errors are detected > > in bce_rx_intr(), the packet gets dropped, which I would expect to be the > > treatment of an offloded chekcum error, but it seems that is not the case. > > I think we're thinking of different checksums -- devices/device drivers drop > frames with bad ethernet checksums, but not IP and above layer checksums. I know I'm stepping on thin ice hear - haven't touched Stevens for a while, (and I doubt it mentions offloading), but if the offload checksum is bad, why not just drop the packet? The way I read the driver, if the offload checksum is on, and if no errors where detected, then it's marked as ok. danny
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?E1LW9yH-0003Xm-KS>