Re: [lwip-users] inet_chksum.c misbehaving with compiler optimisation?

[FreeRTOS Info]

On 22/11/2011 20:13, address@hidden wrote:
> FreeRTOS Info wrote:
>> Just in case anybody is watching this thread:
>>
>> As unlikely as this all seems, having previously isolated one file, I
>> have now isolated it to a single function: lwip_standard_chksum().
>>
>> I have the entire applicatino running at maximum optimisation, except
>> this function, and everything is happy.
>>
>> Put the lowest optimisation on just this single function (which is now
>> in its own file), and the network works, but with a lot of corruption on
>> the wire.
> Like Kieran and Stephen, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of a timing
> issue, too. Especially since checksumming was the most time consuming
> task in lwIP when I last benchmarked (aside of memcpy, but I guess you
> haven't changed the amount of optimization of memcpy in your tests as it
> often comes precompiled with the C library).
> 
> Nevertheless, to prove the function fails, why don't you run a test on
> random data comparing the results of the optimized checksum function
> with a non-optimized version? You can even let that test run for a while
> if you put the two functions into the same binary. If it's a compiler
> bug or anything in that area, this test should show it.

Good thinking!  Will do and report back.



> 
> BTW: what do mean with 'a lot of corruption on the wire', invalid
> checksums or more errors?

It was described in a previous email.  Sorry I have to run now but will
be back online later this evening.  I will explain it again when I post
the results of the above mentioned test.

Regards,
Richard.