Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:36:35 +1000 From: Alan Garfield <alan@fromorbit.com> To: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> Cc: Yar Tikhiy <yar@comp.chem.msu.su>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Corrupt packets in Jnet (Was: Re: rtentry and rtrequest) Message-ID: <462EBEB3.3060208@fromorbit.com> In-Reply-To: <20070424213706.GA1736@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> References: <1176972863.4177.7.camel@hiro.auspc.com.au> <20070419093847.GC60301@comp.chem.msu.su> <1176976273.4177.17.camel@hiro.auspc.com.au> <20070419113842.GE60301@comp.chem.msu.su> <1176990600.4177.26.camel@hiro.auspc.com.au> <20070419175331.GA5999@comp.chem.msu.su> <1177077805.4063.7.camel@hiro.auspc.com.au> <20070420233619.GC52136@comp.chem.msu.su> <1177287886.4075.15.camel@hiro.auspc.com.au> <20070423145429.GF66604@comp.chem.msu.su> <20070424213706.GA1736@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Peter Jeremy wrote: > Given that we are effectivly dealing with a shared memory block, how > does the SP now when the server has finished writing and vice versa? > Is jnet's handling of multiple mbufs making the SP think there are > multiple packets? D'oh! /me slaps forehead I wondereded what the NAK response I saw I was getting after each TX. RX gets an interrupt, TX gets a NAK. If I block sending the next packet until I receive a NAK or I timeout that should fix it. Silly silly boy! >> Your jnet_start() routine fills the tail of the buffer w/zeros >> already, doesn't it? > > I would also suggest padding to 256 bytes with zeroes. Already does that as Yar correctly pointed out. The ADDR port is reset to zero, a bus_space_write_multi1 dumps into the DATA port the packet till there is no packet left, and a for loop fills what's left. Thanks, Alan.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?462EBEB3.3060208>