From: Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
To: Brian Haley <brian.haley@hp.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPv6: optimize echo reply checksum calculation
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2006 19:17:15 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061110191715.GP29920@ftp.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4554CD40.3030801@hp.com>
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 02:04:32PM -0500, Brian Haley wrote:
> Al Viro wrote:
> >so -= 1 is broken even on ia64 and it's *always* broken on big-endian
> >boxen.
>
> It's not broken in ia64, I've tested that, just don't have an x86 for
> testing right now. Can you please apply these changes and prove it's
> broken? This little trick has been done in other UNIXes for years
> without any problems.
Could you fscking read what you've replied to? Your -=1 will turn 0
into 0xffff instead of correct 0xfffe. IOW, it's broken in 1:65536
cases.
On big-endian boxen (which x86 is not, BTW), it will *always* give the
wrong result. -= htons(0x100) is better, but still fscks up in 1:256.
You _can_ adjust the checksum; however it's not that trivial. One working
variant is
if (sum > htons(0x100)
sum -= htons(0x100);
else
sum += 0xffff - htons(0x100);
In little-endian case it turns into
if (sum > 1)
sum--;
else
sum += 0xfffe;
which is why your variant breaks rarely on itanic (or x86 - they are not
different in that respect). You still need to handle that corner case,
though.
As for the various Unices doing the same trick, I suggest you to check
what they _really_ do and report bugs for those that have pure -- and
nothing else.
Again, the checksum is sum modulo 0xffff, *not* 0x10000. And endianness
matters, of course, since the packet type is either LSB or MSB, depending
on it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-11-10 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-11-08 22:13 why do we mangle checksums for v6 ICMP? Al Viro
2006-11-08 22:28 ` Al Viro
2006-11-09 17:32 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-09 23:14 ` David Miller
2006-11-10 16:24 ` [PATCH] IPv6: only modify checksum for UDP Brian Haley
2006-11-10 17:54 ` David Stevens
2006-11-14 0:50 ` David Miller
2006-11-14 1:18 ` Al Viro
2006-11-14 1:44 ` David Stevens
2006-11-14 1:52 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 22:55 ` David Miller
2006-11-10 23:17 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2006-11-10 23:26 ` David Miller
2006-11-10 23:36 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2006-11-12 1:30 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 16:25 ` [PATCH] IPv6: optimize echo reply checksum calculation Brian Haley
2006-11-10 17:34 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 17:51 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 18:05 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 18:20 ` Al Viro
2006-11-10 19:04 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-10 19:17 ` Al Viro [this message]
2006-11-10 21:06 ` Brian Haley
2006-11-11 1:45 ` Al Viro
2006-11-11 18:07 ` why do we mangle checksums for v6 ICMP? Bill Fink
2006-11-13 7:04 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20061110191715.GP29920@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--cc=brian.haley@hp.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).