Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*skb_checksum_help\s*$/: 92 ]

Total 92 documents matching your query.

41. private to each user (score: 1)
Author:
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:46:34 -0800
xxx> Home Page: http://gondor.apana
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01117.html (10,454 bytes)

42. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:50:19 -0800
50125143319.GF31837@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-25 15:33 * David S. Miller <20050124194328.20a106de.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-24 19:43 On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 03:24:31
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01118.html (11,148 bytes)

43. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:15:24 +0100
d to "backport" the 2.6.x patch :-)
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01119.html (12,282 bytes)

44. spire 1524WLMi and RealTek 8169 - very slow (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 14:14:14 -0800
com/dcbw/NetworkManager). This isn't
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01122.html (13,658 bytes)

45. ches API (score: 1)
Author: cbw@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 15:30:20 -0800
nected to form a logic expression a
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01126.html (11,207 bytes)

46. PKT_SCHED: u32 ematch (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2005 15:31:16 -0800
lying classifiers to give hints abo
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg01127.html (11,011 bytes)

47. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:32:41 +0100
* David Coulson <41F432BD.3000300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-23 18:26 I CC'ed netdev, this seems more serious than I thought. Background: David noticed the assertion csum + 2 > offset being trigged in
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02525.html (15,467 bytes)

48. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:49:09 +0100
I CC'ed netdev, this seems more serious than I thought. Background: David noticed the assertion csum + 2 > offset being trigged in skb_checksum_help. I sent him a patch converting it into a warning
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02527.html (9,654 bytes)

49. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 01:53:48 +0100
* Patrick McHardy <41F44605.6050001@xxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-24 01:49 It's a normal forwarded packet as it seems. ipq_kill doesn't show up in other occurances of this bug. kernel BUG at net/core/dev.c:1100
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02528.html (12,580 bytes)

50. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: David Coulson <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:31:02 -0500
Protocol: 17 (UDP) Checksum: 0x7b08 Source: 211.32.117.11 (korean ip) Destination: 10.1.1.5 [0] The originator of this packet is likely a BSD based UNIX box. It is unlikely that it dropped to 49 fro
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02533.html (9,350 bytes)

51. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 12:31:34 +1100
... Something is screwed up here. If the packet really went through forwarding, then skb->ip_summed should be CHECKSUM_NONE. This is done as the first thing in ip_forward(). So if you're seeing CHECK
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02534.html (9,540 bytes)

52. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:27:15 -0800
Yes. This backtrace is very strange. Let me take this chance to get on my podium and re-express my distaste for x86's inaccurate backtraces. They make debugging so difficult. It's time for some dwarf
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02535.html (10,047 bytes)

53. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2005 20:38:07 -0800
Ignore this, I'm wrong. We allocate sk_buff and skb->data seperately, so this can't happen. I'm really showing my age, because many moons ago we did allocate them together :-)
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02536.html (9,460 bytes)

54. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 05:46:39 +0100
Yes. This backtrace is very strange. Let me take this chance to get on my podium and re-express my distaste for x86's inaccurate backtraces. They make debugging so difficult. It's time for some dwar
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02537.html (10,587 bytes)

55. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 15:56:35 +1100
Another possibility is some bogus netfilter module that the reporter is using. His backtrace was showing an ipq_kill which isn't in the main tree. -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email:
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02538.html (10,250 bytes)

56. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 06:07:31 +0100
Another possibility is some bogus netfilter module that the reporter is using. His backtrace was showing an ipq_kill which isn't in the main tree. I was fooled by the name too, ipq_kill doesn't belo
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02539.html (9,979 bytes)

57. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:16:10 +0100
* David S. Miller <20050123202715.281ac87c.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-23 20:27 It's more than that, to make it work on all nics, features must be modified as well and it seems to happen. Besides of
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02542.html (11,134 bytes)

58. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:22:47 +0100
* Patrick McHardy <41F48293.9050301@xxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-24 06:07 I followed this one too because it is directly related to frag reasm but it is a regular occurance called by a timer, here's a backtrac
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02543.html (13,206 bytes)

59. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 13:31:18 +0100
* David Coulson <41F44FD6.4000205@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-01-23 20:31 Yes, this explains the repetive payload. Can you provide your complete netfilter rule set?
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02544.html (9,114 bytes)

60. Re: skb_checksum_help (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2005 14:09:19 +0100
I followed this one too because it is directly related to frag reasm but it is a regular occurance called by a timer, here's a backtrace without ipq_kill: What about modules, .config, ... ? Regards
/archives/netdev/2005-01/msg02545.html (10,448 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu