On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 03:29:44PM -0500, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> John W. Linville wrote:
> >From: John W. Linville <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >At least some versions of the via-velocity hardware only support
> >checksumming IPv4 frames in hardware. However, the driver is currently
> >setting the NETIF_F_HW_CSUM flag, which indicates support for more than
> >just IPv4. This results in errors when trying to use IPv6 over
> >via-velocity hardware.
> IP_CSUM means something different than simply "ipv4-only". It also
> means that the hardware is quite dumb, and can only say "checksum ok"
> rather than "here is the checksum."
>
> Since IP_CSUM means the latter, surely you need more code than just this?
Hmmm...this would seem contrary to the following references:
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/net/0302.3/0003.html
http://efault.net/npat/docs_and_postings/net_device-features/net_device-features.txt
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/linuxdrive3/book/ch17.pdf
And the comment in this snippet from tg3.c:
/* Tigon3 can do ipv4 only... and some chips have buggy
* checksumming.
*/
if ((tp->tg3_flags & TG3_FLAG_BROKEN_CHECKSUMS) == 0) {
dev->features |= NETIF_F_SG | NETIF_F_IP_CSUM;
tp->tg3_flags |= TG3_FLAG_RX_CHECKSUMS;
} else
tp->tg3_flags &= ~TG3_FLAG_RX_CHECKSUMS;
As well as the testimony of my user:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173760
Since the flag in question seems to be related exclusively to
transmission of frames, would a "checksum ok" even make sense?
Can you direct me to an example of the type of code that would seem
to be missing?
John
--
John W. Linville
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
