| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [IPX]: Fix checksum computation. |
| From: | Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:21:31 -0800 |
| Cc: | Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20031031135328.2a997f6a.davem@redhat.com> |
| Organization: | Open Source Development Lab |
| References: | <200310312006.h9VK62Hh005910@hera.kernel.org> <1067635446.11564.92.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20031031132331.35a9aaca.davem@redhat.com> <1067637004.11564.98.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20031031135328.2a997f6a.davem@redhat.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 13:53:28 -0800 "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 13:50:04 -0800 > Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Was an old NG Sniffer being used to verify this? > > Sniffer had a long term problem with IPX checksums. > > No, Arnaldo would verify the checksum by running the > old code and the new code, they produced different > checksums on every sendmsg() call. > > He then tested it further by making sure he could use > netatalk successfully between a 2.4.x Linux appletalk > box and a 2.6.x system with the checksum patch applied. > Without the patch the 2.4.x system would reject all packets > sent by the 2.6.x box. > Actually, the before the "optimization" went in I did testing between old 2.4.x and 2.6.x as well as standalone comparisons. The problem is a compiler screwup, that probably isn't worth investigating further. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [IPX]: Fix checksum computation., David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [IPX]: Fix checksum computation., Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [IPX]: Fix checksum computation., David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [IPX]: Fix checksum computation., Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |