From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48099 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OymPk-0005ho-6a
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 10:04:45 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <tygrys@moo.pl>) id 1OymPi-0005Hn-Oq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 10:04:43 -0400
Received: from moo.pl ([217.149.240.132]:45003)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <tygrys@moo.pl>) id 1OymPi-0005Gz-FP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2010 10:04:42 -0400
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:04:37 +0200
From: Leszek Urbanski <tygrys@moo.pl>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] BUG - qdev - partial loss of network connectivity
Message-ID: <20100923140437.GA9256@moo.pl>
References: <20100922171832.GA28721@moo.pl> <4C9A3FAF.9090503@codemonkey.ws>
	<20100922182049.GA29263@moo.pl> <4C9A4C77.2080806@codemonkey.ws>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4C9A4C77.2080806@codemonkey.ws>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

<4C9A4C77.2080806@codemonkey.ws>; from Anthony Liguori on Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 13:35:35 -0500

> >>Is the guest kernel vanilla 2.6.32.22 or is it a distro kernel?  If the
> >>later, what distro?
> >>
> >>The difference in the two invocations is that with the -device syntax,
> >>you're getting offload features enabled.
> >>     
> >It's vanilla 2.6.32.22, but I also reproduced this on Debian's 2.6.32-23
> >(based on 2.6.32.21).
> >
> >If offload is the only difference, I'll play with different offload
> >options and check which one causes it.
> >   
> 
> It's not technically the only difference but it's the most likely 
> culprit IMHO.

udp fragmentation offload is definitely the culprit.


-- 
Leszek "Tygrys" Urbanski, SCSA, SCNA
 "Unix-to-Unix Copy Program;" said PDP-1. "You will never find a more
  wretched hive of bugs and flamers. We must be cautious." -- DECWARS
     http://cygnus.moo.pl/ -- Cygnus High Altitude Balloon