On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 09:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:05 AM, David Laight
>> wrote:
>
>> Patches are always welcome, :-)
>
> Indeed, I think your patch, if no better alternatives come up soon,
> should be taken.
On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 09:56 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:05 AM, David Laight
> wrote:
> Patches are always welcome, :-)
Indeed, I think your patch, if no better alternatives come up soon,
should be taken.
> > None of this is helping me sort out why netperf udp rr tests w
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:05 AM, David Laight wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 8:56 PM, David Laight
>> wrote:
>> >> > > 2) If 'length % dev->maxpacket == 0' for a multi-fragment packet then
>> >> > >the extra byte isn't added correctly (the code probably falls off
>> >> > >the end of
> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 8:56 PM, David Laight wrote:
> >> > > 2) If 'length % dev->maxpacket == 0' for a multi-fragment packet then
> >> > >the extra byte isn't added correctly (the code probably falls off
> >> > >the end of the scatter-gather list).
> >> >
> >> > Indeed. Ming Lei, shoul
On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 8:56 PM, David Laight wrote:
>> > > 2) If 'length % dev->maxpacket == 0' for a multi-fragment packet then
>> > >the extra byte isn't added correctly (the code probably falls off
>> > >the end of the scatter-gather list).
>> >
>> > Indeed. Ming Lei, should usbnet han
