From: Hans de Bruin <jmdebruin@xmsnet.nl>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Jesse Gross <jesse@nicira.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [regression] 2.6.37+ commit 0363466866d9.... breaks tcp ipv6
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 21:38:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D39EEDA.90902@xmsnet.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1295639745.2609.29.camel@edumazet-laptop>
On 01/21/2011 08:55 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le vendredi 21 janvier 2011 à 20:47 +0100, Hans de Bruin a écrit :
>> On 01/18/2011 11:03 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> Le mardi 18 janvier 2011 à 22:42 +0100, Hans de Bruin a écrit :
>>>> On 01/18/2011 09:06 PM, Jesse Gross wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> You could try "tcpdump -i eth0 ip6 -v"
>>>
>>> I guess you receive frames with bad checksums
>>
>> While you where staring at the code, I was fooling around with tcpdump.
>> And while the problem is fixed, I still have some questions:
>>
>> Is there tool which shows whether a nic supports ipv6 checksum offload
>> or not?
>>
>> I have captured http traffic (wget http://bootes/) between psion (my git
>> tree following laptop) and bootes (something running 2.6.33.7).
>> Attached is a capture with psion running 2.6.37 and one with this
>> morning's git tree. Wat's with the 'chsum ... ( incorrect -> ' lines ?
>> ifconfig does not show errors on either of the machines.
>>
>
> tcpdump gets a copy of outgoing frames before NIC performs tx checksum
> (if tx checksum handled by NIC), so it's normal to have "bad checksums"
> on TX, unless you disable tx offloading (ethtool -K eth0 tx off)
That seem reasonable but: the bug was triggered because my nic could not
offload checksumming, so what's tx=on if there's no support for it? I
have turned tx off and my tcpdump still shows bad checksums on outgoing
tcp/ip6 packets. I have tried 2.6.36: bad checksums, 2.6.35 and
surprise: good checksums with tx=on.
>
> I was referring to check with tcpdump incoming frames, because invalid
> checksums in RX is sign that other peer sent wrong checksums
Ok, thats clear, the receiving site is apparently a more reliable
checksummer than the sending site.
--
Hans
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-21 20:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4D335417.80704@xmsnet.nl>
[not found] ` <4D35EF64.1040906@xmsnet.nl>
2011-01-18 20:06 ` [regression] 2.6.37+ commit 0363466866d9.... breaks tcp ipv6 Jesse Gross
2011-01-18 21:42 ` Hans de Bruin
2011-01-18 22:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-01-21 19:47 ` Hans de Bruin
2011-01-21 19:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-01-21 20:38 ` Hans de Bruin [this message]
2011-01-21 22:15 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
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=4D39EEDA.90902@xmsnet.nl \
--to=jmdebruin@xmsnet.nl \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=jesse@nicira.com \
--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