WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

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

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Network Checksum Removal
From: Bin Ren <bin.ren@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 19:53:42 +0100
Cc: Andrew Theurer <habanero@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jon Mason <jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 23 May 2005 18:53:07 +0000
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=nTQ0zRuJyPXC1VS5IQs1M8sSw05gdyGIKYeX1i7u9++bEVjRCyQ64GobkVbVFqF4vTa73R3BeFp1StMy3xgJuPvF2yhaIEMoB4NIl0w1bvflRmkO5fg6Lkl9x9P8KN6oC89ci8oZWYNwoU4gHZwDODpIAlAYnFrjiDl7/SljNpM=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <0ffb8e53cf9780f38910a275633e0609@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20050520233015.GA26305@xxxxxxxxxx> <32fa5a4ad70f86ee5637d30ffc890017@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <8ae7802505052311086b44a142@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200505231318.10104.jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx> <0ffb8e53cf9780f38910a275633e0609@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: bin.ren@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fantastic! It's working :-D

Thanks a great deal,
Bin

On 5/23/05, Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> I think I found the problem, and I've checked in a fix.
> 
> Bin: can you try dom0->domU networking with latest unstable tree?
> Hopefully your problem is fixed.
> 
> As further work on this, I think I chose a bad name for the
> 'proto_csum_valid' field because sometimes it is set for local packets
> that have had no csum poked into the packet at all. Something like
> 'proto_data_valid' might be better. And communicating this information
> between domains (i.e., that the csum field is blank, but the packet
> data is known good anyway) would be nice. Then domU can decide to add
> the checksum if it passes the packet off to a context that expects a
> valid checksum.
> 
>   -- Keir
> 
> On 23 May 2005, at 19:18, Jon Mason wrote:
> 
> > thanks Bin,
> > I'll take a look at that.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Monday 23 May 2005 01:08 pm, Bin Ren wrote:
> >> It's via the new vif0.0/veth0. I did tcpdump on vif1.0 in dom0 and saw
> >> packets sent by dom0, but got dropped by the netfront on dom1.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Bin
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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