DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: <dev@dpdk.org>, <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>,
	<mb@smartsharesystems.com>, <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
	Yisen Zhuang <yisen.zhuang@huawei.com>,
	"Wei Hu (Xavier)" <xavier.huwei@huawei.com>,
	"Min Hu (Connor)" <humin29@huawei.com>, <huangdengdui@huawei.com>,
	<fengchengwen@huawei.com>, <lihuisong@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] net/hns3: fix Rx packet without CRC data
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 10:32:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5e373805-43d5-77c9-70d8-80e464387d49@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241126161637.4d37c237@hermes.local>

On 2024/11/27 8:16, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 17:04:15 +0800
> Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
>> From: Dengdui Huang <huangdengdui@huawei.com>
>>
>> When KEEP_CRC offload is enabled, the CRC data is still stripped
>> in following cases:
>> 1. For HIP08 network engine, the packet type is TCP and the length
>>     is less than or equal to 60B.
>> 2. For HIP09 network engine, the packet type is IP and the length
>>     is less than or equal to 60B.
>>
>> So driver has to recaculate packet CRC for this rare scenarios.
>>
>> In addition, to avoid impacting performance, KEEP_CRC is not
>> supported when NEON or SVE algorithm is used.
>>
>> Fixes: 8973d7c4ca12 ("net/hns3: support keeping CRC")
>> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dengdui Huang <huangdengdui@huawei.com>
>> Acked-by: Huisong Li <lihuisong@huawei.com>
>> Acked-by: Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>
> 
> Changed my mind on these patches after digging deeper into
> what other drivers are doing. The proposed patches for hns3 do
> the opposite of what the consensus of drivers is.
> 
> When looking at internals, all other drivers do not include the CRC
> in the packet length calculation. It is hard to go back and determine
> the rational for this, but my assumption is that if a packet is received
> (with KEEP_CRC enabled), the application will likely want to send that
> packet to another location, and the transmit side doesn't want the CRC.
> 
> There are a couple of related driver bugs in some drivers in handling
> of the flag as well. One driver (idpf) thinks the CRC should count for the byte
> statistics. This should be clarified and fixed.
> 
> One driver (atlantic) adds a check but doesn't implement the flag; the check for
> valid offload flags is already handled by ethdev API.
> 
> Please resubmit for a later release, and can be picked up then by 24.11 stable.
> 
There is indeed much work to be done to clarify the relationship between 
keep crc and fields in mbuf.
In the current patchset, patch 1 and patch 2 are used for this purpose, 
but a bug occurs.
If CRC is not processed in the TX direction, CRC is forwarded as packet 
data.
As a result, the packet length is increased by 4.
I agree that this part should be carefully investigated before a 
decision is made.

But for patch 3,  this is a serious bug of the hns3 driver and  and is 
irrelevant to the preceding questions.

Could you please apply the patch 3 first to fix the bug of hns3 ?
I can send a single patch of hns3 driver for the next version.

> You have found an area of DPDK which is poorly documented. Will raise an
> agenda at next techboard to get a final agreement, then put that into
> the programmer's guide.
> .

  reply	other threads:[~2024-11-27  2:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-02-06  1:10 [PATCH] net/hns3: fix Rx packet truncation when KEEP CRC enabled Jie Hai
2024-02-07 14:15 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-02-20  3:58   ` Jie Hai
2024-02-23 13:53     ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-02-26  3:16       ` Jie Hai
2024-02-26 16:43         ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-02-28  2:27           ` huangdengdui
2024-02-28 13:07             ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-02-29  3:58               ` huangdengdui
2024-02-29  9:25                 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-03-01  6:55                   ` huangdengdui
2024-03-01 11:10                     ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-03-08 11:36                       ` Jie Hai
2024-03-22  6:28                         ` Jie Hai
2024-06-03  1:38                       ` Jie Hai
2024-06-03  2:33                         ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-06-03  5:24                           ` Morten Brørup
2024-06-03  7:07                           ` Andrew Rybchenko
2024-07-18 11:48 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] bugfix about KEEP CRC offload Jie Hai
2024-07-18 11:48   ` [PATCH v2 1/3] ethdev: add description for " Jie Hai
2024-07-18 11:57     ` Morten Brørup
2024-07-18 11:48   ` [PATCH v2 2/3] net/hns3: fix packet length do not contain CRC data length Jie Hai
2024-07-18 11:48   ` [PATCH v2 3/3] net/hns3: fix Rx packet without CRC data Jie Hai
2024-11-26 23:17     ` [RFC] net/hns3: clarify handling of crc reinsert Stephen Hemminger
2024-07-18 12:35   ` [PATCH v2 0/3] bugfix about KEEP CRC offload lihuisong (C)
2024-11-26 23:12   ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-07-19  9:04 ` [PATCH v3 " Jie Hai
2024-07-19  9:04   ` [PATCH v3 1/3] ethdev: add description for " Jie Hai
2024-09-05  6:33     ` Andrew Rybchenko
2024-11-22 17:10     ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-26  7:47       ` Jie Hai
2024-11-26 23:51         ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-22 17:35     ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-07-19  9:04   ` [PATCH v3 2/3] net/hns3: fix packet length do not contain CRC data length Jie Hai
2024-07-19  9:04   ` [PATCH v3 3/3] net/hns3: fix Rx packet without CRC data Jie Hai
2024-11-24 19:42     ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-25 17:45     ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-26  2:40       ` huangdengdui
2024-11-26  3:16         ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-27  0:16     ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-11-27  2:32       ` Jie Hai [this message]
2024-11-27  3:21         ` Stephen Hemminger
2024-07-19  9:49   ` [PATCH v3 0/3] bugfix about KEEP CRC offload fengchengwen
2024-08-09  9:21   ` Jie Hai
2024-09-05  2:53   ` Jie Hai
2024-10-18  1:39   ` Jie Hai
2024-11-06  2:19   ` Jie Hai
2024-11-13  3:14   ` Jie Hai

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=5e373805-43d5-77c9-70d8-80e464387d49@huawei.com \
    --to=haijie1@huawei.com \
    --cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
    --cc=huangdengdui@huawei.com \
    --cc=humin29@huawei.com \
    --cc=lihuisong@huawei.com \
    --cc=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    --cc=xavier.huwei@huawei.com \
    --cc=yisen.zhuang@huawei.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).