Re: crash in in6_cksum

[tacha%tack.fukui-med.ac.jp@localhost]

Hi.

>> In Message <1204020249.458412.921.nullmailer%galant.ukfsn.org@localhost>
 at Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:04:08 +0000 (GMT)
 Iain Hibbert <plunky%rya-online.net@localhost> wrote:

 > > A bunch of KASSERTs reveal the assertion fails at the second
 > > KASSERT in the following piece of code, which begins with the
 > > line 346 in revision 1.113.
 > 
 > So, it seems that pfil_run_hooks() has modified the mbuf chain and left it
 > without the complete ip6_hdr addressable, and I'm guessing that since
 > ip6_input() already made some effort to pull it up that this is unwanted
 > behaviour (though pfil(9) does not say so).
 > 
 > (I think that the previous versions of in6_cksum() also required this but
 > did no validation, I don't know if that means the calculations were
 > sometimes wrong.. ?)
 > 

I don't understand what mbuf is, it is too difficult for me.

 > Is there a way to know which hooks are being run?

I have no idea.

 > > # In my kernel, I set PFIL_HOOKS and FAST_IPSEC.
 > does this mean that FAST_IPSEC is the packet filter?

Actually, I am just planning to try both of them, so
there is no packet filter rule and no IPSEC configuration.

Tacha