From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, "Jerin Jacob" <jerinj@marvell.com>,
"Aman Singh" <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>,
"Konstantin Ananyev" <konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] net: add smaller IPv4 cksum function for simple cases
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:34:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241017123454.302a7203@hermes.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZxFfcRh9pgkTYVfH@bricha3-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
On Thu, 17 Oct 2024 20:03:13 +0100
Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2024 at 07:15:10PM +0200, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > +/**
> > > + * Process the IPv4 checksum of an IPv4 header without any extensions.
> > > + *
> > > + * The checksum field does NOT have to be set by the caller, the field
> > > + * is skipped by the calculation.
> > > + *
> > > + * @param ipv4_hdr
> > > + * The pointer to the contiguous IPv4 header.
> > > + * @return
> > > + * The complemented checksum to set in the IP packet.
> > > + */
> > > +__rte_experimental
> > > +static inline uint16_t
> > > +rte_ipv4_cksum_simple(const struct rte_ipv4_hdr *ipv4_hdr)
> > > +{
> > > + const uint16_t *v16_h;
> > > + uint32_t ip_cksum;
> > > +
> > > + /*
> > > + * Compute the sum of successive 16-bit words of the IPv4 header,
> > > + * skipping the checksum field of the header.
> > > + */
> > > + v16_h = (const unaligned_uint16_t *)&ipv4_hdr->version_ihl;
> > > + ip_cksum = v16_h[0] + v16_h[1] + v16_h[2] + v16_h[3] +
> > > + v16_h[4] + v16_h[6] + v16_h[7] + v16_h[8] + v16_h[9];
> > > +
> > > + /* reduce 32 bit checksum to 16 bits and complement it */
> > > + ip_cksum = (ip_cksum & 0xffff) + (ip_cksum >> 16);
> > > + ip_cksum = (ip_cksum & 0xffff) + (ip_cksum >> 16);
> > > + ip_cksum = (~ip_cksum) & 0x0000FFFF;
> > > + return (ip_cksum == 0) ? 0xFFFF : (uint16_t) ip_cksum;
> >
> > The zero exception does not apply to the checksum stored in the IP header, only to the checksum in the UDP header.
> >
>
> I was wondering about that, because I didn't see it mentioned anywhere in
> the RFCs I consulted, but on the other hand all the implementations in the
> code seemed to have the check for zero.
>
> > > +}
> >
> > Besides that, for the series,
>
> So, just to confirm, the zero check at the end of the new ip_cksum_simple
> function should be removed and we always return the computed value
> directly?
Depends on usage.
- if the computed value is zero, then 0xffff should be placed in
the IP header.
- often code use ip checksum code to see if incoming checksum is good.
in that case zero means the checksum is valid.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-17 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-17 14:22 [PATCH 0/6] Reduce scope address-of-packed-member warning Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 14:22 ` [PATCH 1/6] ip_frag: remove use of unaligned variable Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 16:26 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-10-17 16:42 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2024-10-17 14:22 ` [PATCH 2/6] efd: remove unnecessary packed attributes Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 16:22 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-10-17 14:22 ` [PATCH 3/6] bus/ifpga: remove packed attribute Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 14:52 ` Xu, Rosen
2024-10-17 16:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-10-17 14:22 ` [PATCH 4/6] pipeline: " Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 14:24 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 16:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-10-17 14:22 ` [PATCH 5/6] net: add smaller IPv4 cksum function for simple cases Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 16:24 ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-10-17 17:01 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 17:15 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-17 19:03 ` Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 19:34 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2024-10-18 0:32 ` Morten Brørup
2024-10-17 14:22 ` [PATCH 6/6] build: limit scope of packed member warning disabling Bruce Richardson
2024-10-17 16:21 ` [PATCH 0/6] Reduce scope address-of-packed-member warning Stephen Hemminger
2024-10-17 17:02 ` Bruce Richardson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20241017123454.302a7203@hermes.local \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=aman.deep.singh@intel.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=konstantin.v.ananyev@yandex.ru \
--cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).