On 2019/1/31 12:33, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:59 PM maowenan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2019/1/31 10:43, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:58 PM maowenan wrote:
On 2019/1/30 4:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:08 AM maowe
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 6:59 PM maowenan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019/1/31 10:43, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:58 PM maowenan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019/1/30 4:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:08 AM maowenan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019/
On 2019/1/31 10:43, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:58 PM maowenan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2019/1/30 4:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:08 AM maowenan wrote:
On 2019/1/29 14:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:04 PM maow
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 5:58 PM maowenan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019/1/30 4:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:08 AM maowenan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019/1/29 14:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:04 PM maowenan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019
On 2019/1/30 4:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:08 AM maowenan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2019/1/29 14:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:04 PM maowenan wrote:
On 2019/1/29 12:01, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 7:00 PM maow
On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 12:08 AM maowenan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019/1/29 14:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:04 PM maowenan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019/1/29 12:01, Tom Herbert wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 7:00 PM maowenan wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Do yo
On 2019/1/29 14:24, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:04 PM maowenan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2019/1/29 12:01, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 7:00 PM maowenan wrote:
Hi all,
Do you have any comments about this change?
On 2019/1/23 11:33,
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:04 PM maowenan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019/1/29 12:01, Tom Herbert wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 7:00 PM maowenan wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >> Do you have any comments about this change?
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019/1/23 11:33, Mao Wenan wrote:
> >>> When udp4_gro_receive()
On 2019/1/29 12:01, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 7:00 PM maowenan wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>> Do you have any comments about this change?
>>
>>
>> On 2019/1/23 11:33, Mao Wenan wrote:
>>> When udp4_gro_receive() get one packet that uh->check=0,
>>> skb_gro_checksum_validate_zero_che
On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 7:00 PM maowenan wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Do you have any comments about this change?
>
>
> On 2019/1/23 11:33, Mao Wenan wrote:
> > When udp4_gro_receive() get one packet that uh->check=0,
> > skb_gro_checksum_validate_zero_check() will set the
> > skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UN
Hi all,
Do you have any comments about this change?
On 2019/1/23 11:33, Mao Wenan wrote:
> When udp4_gro_receive() get one packet that uh->check=0,
> skb_gro_checksum_validate_zero_check() will set the
> skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
> skb->csum_level = 0;
> Then udp_gro_receive() will f
When udp4_gro_receive() get one packet that uh->check=0,
skb_gro_checksum_validate_zero_check() will set the
skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
skb->csum_level = 0;
Then udp_gro_receive() will flush the packet which is not CHECKSUM_PARTIAL,
It is not our expect, because check=0 in udp header i
12 matches
Mail list logo