[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTimW6UszuFspN+S3m8WdS1dPcwTmy+m2kT4X+7MR@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 12:20:14 +0800
From: xiaoyu Du <tingsrain@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: horms@...ge.net.au, ja@....bg, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: [patch nf-next] IPVS: ICMPv6 checksum calculation
Thanks, I learned this. You gave me a big cake.
2010/8/18 David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>:
> From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
> Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 09:21:49 +0900
>
>> [ CCing netdev for comment ]
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 12:25:56PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> ...
>>> May be ip_vs_checksum_complete() is not needed here?
>>> Also, skb->csum is not valid for every ip_summed value.
>>> May be we need to apply CHECKSUM_PARTIAL kind of setup for the IPv6.
>>> Such example is net/ipv6/udp.c:udp6_ufo_send_check().
>>> Later dev_queue_xmit() and skb_checksum_help() should take care
>>> for the next steps. Something like this can be tested:
>>>
>>> icmph->icmp6_cksum = csum_ipv6_magic(&iph->saddr,
>>> &iph->daddr,
>>> skb->len - icmp_offset, IPPROTO_ICMPV6,
>>> 0);
>>> skb->csum_start = skb_network_header(skb) - skb->head +
>>> icmp_offset;
>>> skb->csum_offset = offsetof(struct icmp6hdr, icmp6_cksum);
>>> skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_PARTIAL;
>>>
>
> Yes, using CHECKSUM_PARTIAL unconditionally would work.
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists