On Monday, 12. March 2007 11:44, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Norbert Eicker wrote:
> > On Monday, 12. March 2007 09:28, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Norbert Eicker wrote:
> > > > On Friday, 9. March 2007 17:53, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > > > Linas Vepstas
On Mon, 12 Mar 2007, Norbert Eicker wrote:
> On Monday, 12. March 2007 09:28, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Norbert Eicker wrote:
> > > On Friday, 9. March 2007 17:53, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > > Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > > > > Please apply. The rather long patch description is f
On Monday, 12. March 2007 09:28, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Norbert Eicker wrote:
> > On Friday, 9. March 2007 17:53, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > > Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > > > Please apply. The rather long patch description is from the
> > > > submitter, Norbert Eicker, I don't kn
On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Norbert Eicker wrote:
> On Friday, 9. March 2007 17:53, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > > Please apply. The rather long patch description is from the submitter,
> > > Norbert Eicker, I don't know if that's alright, or if I should ask to
> > > have it trimmed.
>
On Friday, 9. March 2007 17:53, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > Jeff,
> >
> > Please apply. The rather long patch description is from the submitter,
> > Norbert Eicker, I don't know if that's alright, or if I should ask to
> > have it trimmed.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --linas
> >
> > From:
Linas Vepstas wrote:
Jeff,
Please apply. The rather long patch description is from the submitter,
Norbert Eicker, I don't know if that's alright, or if I should ask to
have it trimmed.
Thanks,
--linas
From: Norbert Eicker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I found out that the spidernet-driver is unabl
Jeff,
Please apply. The rather long patch description is from the submitter,
Norbert Eicker, I don't know if that's alright, or if I should ask to
have it trimmed.
Thanks,
--linas
From: Norbert Eicker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I found out that the spidernet-driver is unable to send fragmented IP
Geoff, I suspect gelic_net might have the same problem...
Cheers,
Ben.
On Fri, 2007-03-02 at 18:39 +0100, Norbert Eicker wrote:
> On Fri 2.3.2007 00:34, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 04:52:54PM -0600, Chris Engel wrote:
> > > I tried to apply this patch to 2.6.21-rc2 and CHECKS
On Fri 2.3.2007 00:34, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 04:52:54PM -0600, Chris Engel wrote:
> > I tried to apply this patch to 2.6.21-rc2 and CHECKSUM_HW appears
> > to be changed to CHECKSUM_COMPLETE
Oops. I did not test this on the actual 2.6.21-rc2 before sending it.
It worked fi
On Thu, Mar 01, 2007 at 04:52:54PM -0600, Chris Engel wrote:
> I tried to apply this patch to 2.6.21-rc2 and CHECKSUM_HW appears to be
> changed to CHECKSUM_COMPLETE
The use of CHECKSUM_HW was replaced by CHECKSUM_PARTIAL and CHECKSUM_COMPLETE
on a cae-by-case basis, in the patch series leading u
Hi,
I found out that the spidernet-driver is unable to send fragmented IP
frames.
Let me just recall the basic structure of "normal" UDP/IP/Ethernet
frames (that actually work):
- It starts with the Ethernet header (dest MAC, src MAC, etc.)
- The next part is occupied by the IP header (versio
11 matches
Mail list logo