This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Patch fixing vlan handling when network-bridge scriptis

To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Patch fixing vlan handling when network-bridge scriptis used
From: Michael Brade <brade@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 20:25:42 +0200
Delivery-date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:26:45 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4C6DBA16.8020806@xxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: K Desktop Environment
References: <232221223.568081282131308987.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <201008191759.39253.brade@xxxxxxx> <4C6DBA16.8020806@xxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/; KDE/4.4.5; i686; ; )
On Friday 20 August 2010 01:11:18 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>  On 08/19/2010 08:59 AM, Michael Brade wrote:
> > But I had to add the "ethtool -K $vif tx off" to vif-bridge to fix the
> > checksums error. Maybe this could be added by default with a check for
> > ethtool?
> This was a problem in pvops dom0 kernels a long time ago, but it has
> been fixed for... maybe a year?  If you're still having problems without
> the ethtool, please report them.

I did in my last mail and now I also added it to Bugzilla. Do you have enough 
information in that entry or do I need to add other things as well?

Btw, it did work with HVM where the guest communicates over the tap1.0 
interface, it just doesn't work with PV-guests on the vif1.0 interface. What 
is the difference between the two, why does HVM use one and PV the other?

Michael Brade;                                              KDE Developer
  |-mail: echo brade !#|tr -d "c oh"|s\e\d 's/e/\@/2;s/$/.org/;s/bra/k/2'
  °--web: http://www.behindkde.org/people/michaelb/

KDE 4: Beyond Your Expectations

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Xen-devel mailing list