On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 05:27:25PM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
> Yes, probably. So I take it the assumption in HIFN that the
> sg-list length matches req->nbytes is incorrect?
Where were you seeing the discrepancy? If it's at the point of
entry into the HIFN code then the bug is further up. I
Herbert Xu wrote:
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I couldn't figure out where in the crypto code the
nbytes decrement by 12 bytes compared to the length
seen when setting up the crypto operation happens
or I might have tried to properly fix it myself.
I'll happily test patches in case
Patrick McHardy wrote:
Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Hi Patrick.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 05:44:42PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Any chance you can apply following patch and check output for correct
and broken cases (it will produce 2 or 3 debug strings for each crypto
operati
Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
Hi Patrick.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 05:44:42PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
Any chance you can apply following patch and check output for correct
and broken cases (it will produce 2 or 3 debug strings for each crypto
operation)?
diff --git a/drive
