Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Network Checksum Removal

[Bin Ren <bin.ren@xxxxxxxxx>]

Keir has removed 'SET_ETHTOOL_OPS(dev, &network_ethtool_ops);' from
your patch. The operations are not supported.

- Bin

On 5/23/05, Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You can disable the checksum "offload" with ethtool (in domU).
> "ethtool -k eth0" will show whether it is enabled or not.
> "ethtool -K eth0 tx off" will disable it.
> "ethtool -K eth0 tx on" will enable it.
> 
> I tested it throughly with bridging before I submitted the patch, so it should
> be working.  I'll download the latest source and verify that it works on my
> test system.
> 
> Thanks for your help,
> Jon
> 
> On Monday 23 May 2005 11:06 am, Bin Ren wrote:
> > Start from fresh again. The same weird symptoms.
> >
> > - Bin
> >
> > On 5/23/05, Bin Ren <bin.ren@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > I'm using bridge and stock scripts. I start to doubt it's caused csum
> > > offloading, as I'm seeing some weird things. (1) it's possible to do
> > > interdomain iperf, which binds to ports > 1024 (2) ssh and nfs don't
> > > work. In both cases, dom0 is the server, dom1 is the client. tcpdump
> > > on dom0 doesn't show any incoming packets from dom1.
> > >
> > > I'm recompiling everything again.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Bin
> > >
> > > On 5/23/05, Andrew Theurer <habanero@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > On Monday 23 May 2005 10:31, Bin Ren wrote:
> > > > > It seems to break the interdomain ssh and nfs on my machine. Digging
> > > > > for reasons.
> > > >
> > > > Are you using bridge or network model?
> > > >
> > > > > - Bin
> > > > >
> > > > > On 5/23/05, Andrew Theurer <habanero@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > > I've checked in a modified version of your patch that hopefully
> > > > > > > deals with propagating checksum information in both directions
> > > > > > > across a virtual bridge or router. I replaced your skb flags with
> > > > > > > two new ones -- proto_csum_blank and proto_csum_valid.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The former indicates that the protocol-level checksum needs
> > > > > > > filling in. This is not a problem for local processing, but the
> > > > > > > flag is picked up before sending to a physical interface and
> > > > > > > fixed up.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The latter indicates that the proto-level checksum has been
> > > > > > > validated since arrival at localhost (*or* that the packet
> > > > > > > originated from a domU on localhost). This flag survives crossing
> > > > > > > a bridge/router so we can trust it when deciding if checksum
> > > > > > > validation is required.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'll push the patch to the bkbits repository just as soon as
> > > > > > > bkbits rematerialises. :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If you have any performance or stress tests that you were using
> > > > > > > to test checksum offloading, it would be great to find out how
> > > > > > > they perform on the checked-in version!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now that BK is up, I'll run some netperf tests before/after that
> > > > > > changeset and see what we get.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Andrew
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Xen-devel mailing list
> > > > > > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-devel mailing list
> > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
>

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel