Return-path: Received: from purr.warmcat.com ([87.106.142.209]:40859 "EHLO mailserver.mog.warmcat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759575AbXHCKfp (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Aug 2007 06:35:45 -0400 Message-ID: <46B304FF.3000305@warmcat.com> Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 11:35:43 +0100 From: Andy Green MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: Ulrich Kunitz , linux-wireless , Daniel Drake Subject: Re: mac80211 driver interface semantics References: <46B27729.5030406@gentoo.org> <20070803052935.GA12683@deine-taler.de> <46B2E06F.4090706@warmcat.com> <1186134894.4647.24.camel@johannes.berg> <46B3032C.5040306@warmcat.com> <1186137166.4647.34.camel@johannes.berg> In-Reply-To: <1186137166.4647.34.camel@johannes.berg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Somebody in the thread at some point said: > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 11:27 +0100, Andy Green wrote: > >> Inside that question, if you mark up skb->ip_summed with CHECKSUM_NONE, >> include/linux/skbuff.h says this: >> >> /* A. Checksumming of received packets by device. >> * >> * NONE: device failed to checksum this packet. >> * skb->csum is undefined. >> >> If we mark up the skb with FCS-broken packets with that, maybe it would >> be compatible with the networking stack for this purpose. > > No, that's the IP checksum. It may or may not be broken if the FCS CRC > fails. Right, but since we marked up the skb "the integrity of the IP checksum is unknown", if anything wants to use the packet it should re-check it itself. Won't that do? -Andy