LVS
lvs-users
Google
 
Web LinuxVirtualServer.org

Re: Incremental checksum updates for 2.2.19-1.0.8

To: Roberto Nibali <ratz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Incremental checksum updates for 2.2.19-1.0.8
Cc: <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:37:53 +0300 (EEST)
        Hello,

On Wed, 10 Oct 2001, Roberto Nibali wrote:

> Good evening, Julian,

        Already morning :)

> >         ... by this way the masq code can be debugged without worrying
> > for wrong calcs in skb->csum (CHECKSUM_HW), the check is performed
> > from scratch.
>
> I wonder if this is really what you want, but anyway ...

        No, I don't want it, it is a crap that is already present,
I never use it. Of course, I didn't used CONFIG_IP_MASQ_DEBUG may be
from 2 years ago :) It is not compiled by default

> >         There is no #define but it is added from the authors in
> > include/linux/config.h when needed :) But the sysctl var is present
> > in net/ipv4/sysctl_net_ipv4.c
>
> Yeah, I saw it and I thought this would be the case. Why not simply
> add a menuconfig entry and mark it EXPLOSIVE/HAZARDOUS? You're the
> new masquerading code maintainer for 2.2.x anyways :)

        Nobody from the maintainers wants/have the time to touch the
masquerade

> >         Oh, yes, bug fixes. Better to use latest 2.0.40pre :)
>
> Doesn't compile, sched.c mistake ;) I actually still use it. The only
> big problem I have there is that we have this braindamaged alias support
> with every alias having an own device struct. Very funny, if you have
> more then 100 devices considering dev_alloc_name() in ../core/dev.c
> and other nasty things. And the small problems are the 4MB of patches
> I have which impossibly can go into mainstream.

        Grr

> >         What is the life without fun :) What I know is that this
> > patch works for:
> >
> > - LVS-DR
> > - LVS-NAT FTP with ip_masq_ftp
> > - Normal LVS-NAT without FTP
> > - Masquerade
> >
> >         I still didn't found where it crashes but may be you'll be
> > lucky enough :) The other danger is when the packets leave the box
>
> LOL! Aha, lucky, ok, I'll give it a whirl.
>
> > with wrong checksum. You have time to make new kernel before your
> > workshop tomorrow :) And tomorrow I'll run testlvs on my NICs.
>
> I hope I find time, still have to prepare the workshop and total lack
> of sleep.
>
> Thanks for the clarifications, I will certainly urge the people
> attending
> the course to patch in your fresh patch :)

        Very good :)

> Best regards,
> Roberto Nibali, ratz

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>