From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:00:27 +0100 (BST) Received: from extgw-uk.mips.com ([IPv6:::ffff:62.254.210.129]:33558 "EHLO bacchus.net.dhis.org") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 16:00:00 +0100 Received: from dea.linux-mips.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by bacchus.net.dhis.org (8.13.4/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j8KExroO013859; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:59:53 +0100 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by dea.linux-mips.net (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id j8KExm3e013832; Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:59:48 +0100 Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 15:59:48 +0100 From: Ralf Baechle To: Michael Uhler Cc: "'Matej Kupljen'" , "'Maciej W. Rozycki'" , "'Daniel Jacobowitz'" , linux-mips@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix TCP/UDP checksums on the Broadcom SB-1 Message-ID: <20050920145948.GF3159@linux-mips.org> References: <20050920110609.GB3159@linux-mips.org> <00da01c5bdef$596ee380$0502a8c0@MIPS.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <00da01c5bdef$596ee380$0502a8c0@MIPS.COM> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 8999 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 07:26:54AM -0700, Michael Uhler wrote: > For what it's worth, the 64-bit architecture, both prior to and with MIPS64, > has always required that 64-bit GPRs be sign-extended when used with 32-bit > operations. I'm surprised that this wasn't seen on more 64-bit CPUs than > just the SB1. Usually resends will paper over this kind of problem. It's only a question of time until they succeed for any protocol that changed the packet content sufficiently to make the checksum work eventually. But of course performance will suffer and as a matter of statistics certain IP address and port ranges are going to suffer more than others. Ralf