Take 2: new IP Checksum Code from DragonFlyBSD

[Alexander Leidinger]

Quoting Andrew Gallatin <gallatin at cs.duke.edu> (Thu, 25 May 2006 12:20:17 -0400 (EDT)):

> If we're going to do anything,  I'd prefer to see us skip
> the checksum on everything sent across lo0 and stick with
> the slower, yet known to work, existing checksum code for
> slow interfaces.

The current code is known to work with the current gcc we use. It is
known to *not* work with the Intel C compiler. It may or may not work
with an upcomming gcc version.

The current code is a maze of assembly and macros, the new one is
straight forward C and a little bit of assembly. And the new one is
also known to work in DragonFlyBSD. Do you expect *this* code to act
differently between FreeBSD and DragonFlyBSD?

What's the technical backing of your preference to stick with the
current code? How does the technical backing of your preference compare
to the technical arguments I presented in this thread regarding the
priority of the arguments?

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
Selling GoodYear Eagle F1 235/40ZR18, 2x 4mm + 2x 5mm, ~150 EUR
you have to pick it up between Germany/Saarland and Luxembourg/Capellen
http://www.Leidinger.net    Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7
http://www.FreeBSD.org       netchild @ FreeBSD.org  : PGP ID = 72077137