On 03/12/2011 10:59 PM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
> Hi Patrick,
>
> I noticed another problem with the macvlan driver.
>
> In the function dev_forward_skb the test always succeed in the second
> condition making the packet to be dropped.
>
> ...
>
> if (unlikely(!(dev->flags& IFF_UP) ||
>
Hi Patrick,
I noticed another problem with the macvlan driver.
In the function dev_forward_skb the test always succeed in the second
condition making the packet to be dropped.
...
if (unlikely(!(dev->flags & IFF_UP) ||
(skb->len > (dev->mtu + dev->hard_header_len + VLAN_HLE
Am 02.03.2011 19:33, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 03/02/2011 07:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Am 02.03.2011 17:03, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>> On 03/02/2011 12:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Am 01.03.2011 21:04, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 03/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>>
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 2:33 AM, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>
> One last question. In the case of broadcast packets with maclvan in bridge
> mode.
> We will have the packets going through each macvlan port and also to the
> lower-device, right ?
> For the latter, don't we have a problem if the packet is
Am 02.03.2011 17:03, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 03/02/2011 12:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Am 01.03.2011 21:04, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>>> On 03/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Patrick, do you have any suggestions to fix this ?
Since the frames are only looped back locall
On 03/02/2011 12:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Am 01.03.2011 21:04, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 03/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Patrick, do you have any suggestions to fix this ?
>>> Since the frames are only looped back locally, I suppose the easiest
>>> fix would be to mark t
On 03/02/2011 07:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Am 02.03.2011 17:03, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
>> On 03/02/2011 12:03 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>> Am 01.03.2011 21:04, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
On 03/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Patrick, do you have any suggestions to fix thi
Am 01.03.2011 21:04, schrieb Daniel Lezcano:
> On 03/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>> Patrick, do you have any suggestions to fix this ?
>> Since the frames are only looped back locally, I suppose the easiest
>> fix would be to mark them with CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY. Alternatively
>> we ne
On 01.03.2011 14:29, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 02/28/2011 08:45 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> In the normal case, dummy0 is supposed to drop the packets. But with
>>> macvlan these packets are broadcasted to the other macvlan ports, so no
>>> checksum is computed when the packets are transmitted bet
On 03/01/2011 05:51 PM, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> On 01.03.2011 14:29, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> On 02/28/2011 08:45 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
In the normal case, dummy0 is supposed to drop the packets. But with
macvlan these packets are broadcasted to the other macvlan ports, so no
chec
On 02/28/2011 08:45 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le dimanche 27 février 2011 à 21:35 +0100, Daniel Lezcano a écrit :
>> On 02/27/2011 08:50 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> Le dimanche 27 février 2011 à 16:14 +0100, Daniel Lezcano a écrit :
On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrian Nord wrote:
> On Mon, Feb
Le dimanche 27 février 2011 à 21:35 +0100, Daniel Lezcano a écrit :
> On 02/27/2011 08:50 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Le dimanche 27 février 2011 à 16:14 +0100, Daniel Lezcano a écrit :
> >> On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrian Nord wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano w
On 02/27/2011 08:50 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le dimanche 27 février 2011 à 16:14 +0100, Daniel Lezcano a écrit :
>> On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrian Nord wrote:
>>> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
I Cc'ed the netdev mailing list and Patrick in case my analysis i
Le dimanche 27 février 2011 à 16:14 +0100, Daniel Lezcano a écrit :
> On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrian Nord wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >> I Cc'ed the netdev mailing list and Patrick in case my analysis is wrong
> >> or incomplete.
> > I'm confirming,
On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrian Nord wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> I Cc'ed the netdev mailing list and Patrick in case my analysis is wrong
>> or incomplete.
> I'm confirming, that this happens only when macvlan's are onto dummy net
> device. In case of
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 11:20:09AM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> I saw you were using the command 'nc6', do you use netcat with ipv6 ?
Well, yes and no. I've tried both ipv4 and ipv6 and my notebook has no
ipv6 address assigned, so most terrible connection was though ipv4 =).
At another server t
On 02/23/2011 06:13 PM, Andrian Nord wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>> I Cc'ed the netdev mailing list and Patrick in case my analysis is wrong
>> or incomplete.
> I'm confirming, that this happens only when macvlan's are onto dummy net
> device. In case of
On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 05:07:31PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> I Cc'ed the netdev mailing list and Patrick in case my analysis is wrong
> or incomplete.
I'm confirming, that this happens only when macvlan's are onto dummy net
device. In case of some physical interface under macvlan there is no
18 matches
Mail list logo
