Re: TCP bad checksum with 2.1.125

Mike A. Harris (mharris@ican.net)
Thu, 15 Oct 1998 08:49:01 -0400 (EDT)

On Mon, 12 Oct 1998, Peter Loje Hansen wrote:

>> TCPv4 bad checksum from 209.133.83.18:0050 to
>> 206.248.78.137:0431, len=632/632/652
>> TCPv4 bad checksum from 199.183.24.237:0050 to
>> 206.248.78.137:0445, len=1480/1480/1500
>>
>>
>> I don't know if this is a bug, or just an informative message, so
>> I leave it to you all to decide.
>>
>> I'm using 2.1.125 compiled for uniprocessor on an AMD-K6-200.
>>
>> If any other info is needed, let me know.
>
>I'm having the same problem, and I think it must be a bug because I
>saw my first corrupted ftp transfer ever.
>
>The problem only occurs when connecting to a customers "new" server,
>a Digital 3000R/SMP. The NIC is A DE434/5:
>
>eth0: DE434/5 at 0x7400 (PCI bus 0, device 10), h/w address 08:00:2b:e6:a5:14,
> and requires IRQ15 (provided by PCI BIOS).
>de4x5.c:V0.542 1998/9/15 davies@maniac.ultranet.com
>
>I have made some tests with 2 local machines which both have 3c509 NIC's.
>
>local 3000R
>2.1.124 <-> 2.1.125 TCPv4 bad checksum
>2.1.125 <-> 2.1.125-SMP TCPv4 bad checksum
>2.1.125 <-> 2.1.125-UP TCPv4 bad checksum
>2.0.33 <-> 2.1.125-SMP OK
>2.0.33 <-> 2.1.125-UP OK
>
>local1 local2
>2.1.125 <-> 2.1.125 OK
>
>I suspect it has something to do with changes made to
>linux/drivers/net/de4x5.c in patch-2.1.125.gz?
>
>But why does the errors not show up when connecting from 2.0.33?
>
>Can you see the same pattern?

I don't use 2.0.33. I use 2.0.35, 2.1.125. I only get trouble
in 2.1.125. I haven't tested any other kernels prior to 2.1.125
because necessary features didn't work for me until 2.1.125. Now
I'm back to 2.0.35 until 126 comes out.

TTYL

--
Mike A. Harris  -  Computer Consultant  -  Linux advocate


Linux software galore:  http://freshmeat.net




-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/