Izumi Tsutsui <tsutsui@ceres.dti.ne.jp> writes:
> perry@piermont.com wrote:
>
>> >  Please post individual bugs/fixes which you can confirm.
>> 
>> I can't confirm them without doing the port, at which point why would
>> I need to post them? :)
>
> Otherwise this PR will never be closed and makes no sense, I'm afraid.

Clearly the PR makes plenty of sense. There are documented issues that
FreeBSD has fixed. Again, I can't absolutely confirm that their fixes
work without actually trying them, but I see no reason that I need to
have fixed a problem before filing a PR.

>> Clearly the fix that prevents certain versions of the card from
>> screwing up hardware assisted checksums is important.
>
> Only this? Or more other 8139C+ fixes?
> Is it a good idea to pull all fixes blindly?

I suspect that most of their fixes should be pulled "blindly" -- we
pulled their driver "blindly" after all, assuming that it was
correctly written.

> Anyway please also see recent posts on tech-kern and tech-net.
> yamt said that hw ip4csum bug only happens with
> very small packet (less than ETHER_PAD_LEN) so FreeBSD's
> fix is not right.

FreeBSD's fix is for precisely that problem.

> Furthermore, they choose to copy small packets
> to a new mbuf for padding, and several people object it.

When and if they find a better fix they can implement it.

-- 
Perry E. Metzger		perry@piermont.com