On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 03:27:03AM +0300, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Andrew Vagin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > With this patch, I can't connect two local tcp ipv6 sockets.
> >
> > [root@fc22-vm criu]# strace -e network python ipv6.py
> > socket(PF_INET6,
Hi,
With this patch, I can't connect two local tcp ipv6 sockets.
[root@fc22-vm criu]# strace -e network python ipv6.py
socket(PF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 3
bind(3, {sa_family=AF_INET6, sin6_port=htons(8976), inet_pton(AF_INET6, "::",
_addr), sin6_flowinfo=0, sin6_scope_id=0}, 28) = 0
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Andrew Vagin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With this patch, I can't connect two local tcp ipv6 sockets.
>
> [root@fc22-vm criu]# strace -e network python ipv6.py
> socket(PF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 3
> bind(3, {sa_family=AF_INET6,
On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Andrew Vagin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> With this patch, I can't connect two local tcp ipv6 sockets.
>
> [root@fc22-vm criu]# strace -e network python ipv6.py
> socket(PF_INET6, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 3
> bind(3, {sa_family=AF_INET6,
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Tom Herbert
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Tom Herbert
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:25 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Pravin Shelar
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 12:20 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Pravin Shelar
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
>>> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 6:40 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 03:55:46PM -0700, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
>> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
>> offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such
VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such skb
can cause the panic when checksum is calculated on skb. Following patch
fixes the bug by setting checksum unnecessary while pulling outer header.
---8<---
[
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
> offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such skb
> can cause the panic when checksum is calculated on skb. Following patch
>
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 03:55:46PM -0700, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
> offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such skb
> can cause the panic when checksum is calculated on skb. Following patch
> fixes the bug
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
>> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
>> offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such skb
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 9:12 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
>> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
>> offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such skb
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Pravin Shelar wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
>>> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Pravin B Shelar wrote:
> VXLAN device can receive skb with checksum partial. But the checksum
> offset could be in outer header which is pulled on receive. Such skb
> can cause the panic when checksum is calculated on skb. Following patch
>
18 matches
Mail list logo