From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D823A0542; Tue, 5 Jul 2022 18:30:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0F3D4021D; Tue, 5 Jul 2022 18:30:35 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D713400D7; Tue, 5 Jul 2022 18:30:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FD305C014B; Tue, 5 Jul 2022 12:30:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 05 Jul 2022 12:30:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1657038633; x= 1657125033; bh=xONlh/mub5tam9HP3WAYdg3JzagRmYzzjPscjPb54Hg=; b=T qqxifUmMU7AbEgNtnIOuzHS3GhJ1R6EN2MjHRxuJB0uBQ5lUbSOHeQs5BfHaQ5YO VXPk6YEU9jPAvgfmuNNTGaeIOwhlRikVsVK2C3SWIZmjTeCwIzC2GsaAuxp0RLc0 e8T+RDg0wJ66DCwR84ySYhVj4H3j/Ks/ld+re8Pc1Y1vbOgCPFGGcKArL3eVgJ8M MYf36kd0zdUupqiIMUv/e4Da9xDRo1y5WFlxXblbgPJ/ufYYhz/n5Z1tRsLaiFbS IQQ0xVvER+BwokyGVCNtOVI6ItGv1rDkBLRLLZJMYUYAInpXIzxA91pOJiYIQyAK MHXt83m4PfBlmB53IYBPg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1657038633; x= 1657125033; bh=xONlh/mub5tam9HP3WAYdg3JzagRmYzzjPscjPb54Hg=; b=I 3MIFLHIDEYSC4F/0DDAPRQ56klam4sJjUmPLYruVu6hQdUAZZ7eK5kUz1sHFKw4O /M9J7jXx/cBqiaDJbQgYe0crK+NjVLn3D6fsjeCg9b64QhxnjKeCulVZz1ixEjMZ IQOWevCcZCTq1k5C7/kFq9/PqMv6oFv/yOo921mHcJi19YkNmRVG6F9Re5iR5d6Z nM5X9dWZ1DQflxWmjEE8w3x2NB94OrYEymu6dSMpKihRQRuZjow4hZc1ElzyjJ0A xhYQlK6jxwKZNNtGeLDa5Qgwr4R2b63LLxhfMNZQ04X0VPn9LQWtdNM8m5HDT9bt V+dS40AuxZoMU/E6YjTRA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudeiuddguddtgecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmd enucfjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhho mhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqne cuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddt ieekgfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 5 Jul 2022 12:30:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Kumara Parameshwaran Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "stable@dpdk.org" , "Hu, Jiayu" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] gro: bug fix in identifying fragmented packets Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2022 18:30:30 +0200 Message-ID: <26413784.p16igRAIYV@thomas> In-Reply-To: <962006acc1164a068d8cb727516c5816@intel.com> References: <20220320101232.34438-1-kumaraparamesh92@gmail.com> <20220627103114.94924-1-kumaraparmesh92@gmail.com> <962006acc1164a068d8cb727516c5816@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org > > From: Kumara Parameshwaran > > > > A packet with RTE_PTYPE_L4_FRAG(0x300) contains both RTE_PTYPE_L4_TCP > > (0x100) & RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP (0x200). A fragmented packet as defined in > > rte_mbuf_ptype.h cannot be recognized as other L4 types and hence the > > GRO layer should not use IS_IPV4_TCP_PKT or IS_IPV4_UDP_PKT for > > RTE_PTYPE_L4_FRAG. Hence, if the packet type is RTE_PTYPE_L4_FRAG the ip > > header should be parsed to recognize the appropriate IP type and invoke the > > respective gro handler. > > > > Fixes: 1ca5e6740852 ("gro: support UDP/IPv4") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Kumara Parameshwaran > > Reviewed-by: Jiayu Hu Applied, thanks.