On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 3:22 PM David Miller wrote:
>
> From: Kalash Nainwal
> Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 16:23:04 -0800
>
> > Set rtm_table to RT_TABLE_COMPAT for ipv6 for tables > 255 to
> > keep legacy software happy. This is similar to what was done for
> > ipv4
Set rtm_table to RT_TABLE_COMPAT for ipv6 for tables > 255 to
keep legacy software happy. This is similar to what was done for
ipv4 in commit 709772e6e065 ("net: Fix routing tables with
id > 255 for legacy software").
Signed-off-by: Kalash Nainwal
---
net/ipv6/route.c | 2 +-
1
The function is called like this- dev->hard_header(skb, dev, ptype,
dest_hw, src_hw, skb->len); where "skb->protocol" is same as "ptype",
but the former is expected to be in network byte order before calling
hard_header, while latter in host byte order (eth_header internally
does its own conversio
>
> so is it possible to unregister tcp and register my protocol dynamically.
inet_unregister_protosw()/inet_register_protosw().
oops...can't unregister tcp (permanent protocol).
-Kalash
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL
On 6/7/07, Tej Parkash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hi
i just want to have something like tcp layer sitting below inet layer.
so that i can directly offload everything to NIC
and i want it to be placed dynamically. so depending on the nic i can
offload the feature or can make it normal flow.
i.e.
On 2/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I am working on optimizing the TCP-code for a certain type of TCP-stream,
and to make one of my optimizations work I need to copy data from one SKB
(the data field of the skb) to another SKB (data field).
Currently I am using memcp
On 2/24/07, Kristian Evensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I have been looking quite deeply into the TCP-code, but there is one
thing I simply dont manage to understand. Can the code process more than
one skb on a socket at the time, or is it strictly one and one?
E.g say that you are going
On 1/20/07, Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 15:54 +0530, kalash nainwal wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> We've a kernel (n/w) module, which sits over ethernet. Whenever a pkt
> is received (in softirq), after doing some minimal processing,
> wake
Hi there,
We've a kernel (n/w) module, which sits over ethernet. Whenever a pkt
is received (in softirq), after doing some minimal processing,
wake_up() is called to wake up another kernel thread which does rest
(bulk) of the processing.
We notice that this wake_up() call is sometimes taking as
