From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rask Ingemann Lambertsen Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] rx_all e100 patch Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:21:56 +0100 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20031125162152.D1107@sygehus.dk> References: <3FC30AEE.7000005@candelatech.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "'netdev@oss.sgi.com'" Return-path: To: Ben Greear Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3FC30AEE.7000005@candelatech.com>; from greearb@candelatech.com on Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 11:55:26PM -0800 Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 11:55:26PM -0800, Ben Greear wrote: > @@ -2052,13 +2065,26 @@ > if (bdp->rev_id >= D102_REV_ID) { > skb->ip_summed = e100_D102_check_checksum(rfd); > } else { > - skb->ip_summed = e100_D101M_checksum(bdp, skb); > + skb->ip_summed = e100_D101M_checksum(bdp, skb, !!(dev->priv_flags & IFF_ACCEPT_ALL_FRAMES)); > } Shouldn't that be IFF_SAVE_FCS rather than IFF_ACCEPT_ALL_FRAMES? > } else { > skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_NONE; > } > > + /* Show the FCS? */ > + if (unlikely(dev->priv_flags & IFF_SAVE_FCS)) { > + if (bdp->rev_id < D102_REV_ID) { > + /* Have to over-write the two IP checksum bytes > + * TODO: Will this break vlan_hwaccel_rx??? > + */ > + skb->tail[-4] = skb->tail[-2]; > + skb->tail[-3] = skb->tail[-1]; > + skb->tail[-2] = skb->tail[0]; > + skb->tail[-1] = skb->tail[1]; > + } > + } > + I don't understand this part of the code. The 55x docs say that the IP checksum bytes are transferred to memory _following_ the FCS. > +/** > + * e100_config_promisc - configure promiscuous mode > + * @bdp: atapter's private data struct > + * @enable: should we enable this option or not s/atapter/adapter/g s/etherne /ethernet /g too, somewhere, IIRC. > +/* Only valid for 82558 and 82559. Must be zero for 82557 */ > +#define CB_CFIG_LONG_RX_OK BIT_3 /* OK to receive Long frames */ I find it disappointing that the good, old 82586 transfers long frames to memory without complaint while newer chips such as the 82557 and tulip can't/don't. -- Regards, Rask Ingemann Lambertsen