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 E26C2A0A0E; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE9C410F4; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFEEA40697 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:43 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1620743503; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=+FXZwFxxkASp4q1KhjBG78wYb2QhNER2WP/RVB+ab2o=; b=NI1xfZFnwqcCF6gbqfWzNp6gggsHwSSPFX9IIhnPYoaWo0qVnc+1sUZS6jyc1AglI4p9fm hpEHz3yX2tesZPTpFGQ8mtu1C+C2IoA2c9URgRHMqXj/pJ727aZ63IWr+05TXVrIA0+nHL cqJ36vQRnIAvjqRIVB8evZHmAFn6Mqw= Received: from mail-vs1-f69.google.com (mail-vs1-f69.google.com [209.85.217.69]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-191-S9neSdwgNPq0uD7FexFlOg-1; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:31:41 -0400 X-MC-Unique: S9neSdwgNPq0uD7FexFlOg-1 Received: by mail-vs1-f69.google.com with SMTP id l6-20020a67d5060000b0290228235bc72dso9753941vsj.13 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 07:31:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=+FXZwFxxkASp4q1KhjBG78wYb2QhNER2WP/RVB+ab2o=; b=ajBUyrnN+bo3hp4lU+Uz2Ox3Hzc+AAOeFYwW5HET3IuSuaXk4IS7YeHb2pH/IV4701 b8U4U/tHYtI+i+nQpFzt84mAcVYox9IcOCblJmA2lFppqvmj3ThTv4of3ozJLzcFcI8l mGm/kTs1woyvxn3DsXDjpktst/g/sZDdQQ5eubc2/Qe1MWHkEa8vjKct7o9FLlW3zO5k 2KvXzTr5v878IOsCx2vOC/oR4PP5nEHrzKnjgPSB26aD3VDtLFWGHfjuC9dij2YZUOPh 44CP/mm5NuAt7zUOk57d4QbnVBJpM75gCvac3m+6TuFmh/ImphJH7VynQJ57aps9dPfR qonA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533FZcK/9tlyGa33GU9qFlRsYlyKw+RJeWwdSVKBpK9nzNLEZBxa 4lh9BXFi7hJGfU1y/QuvWKUcjDiPywlVlBMj+22P5XGX2YH9c3ItihRsZ6ytaLkf3gmZRsQIaG+ M/yEeO+IP3ZR8HBqA0iU= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fb53:: with SMTP id e19mr26570835vsr.10.1620743500837; Tue, 11 May 2021 07:31:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzNZJIswQAFPnPeS2ECT5T9i5YMkpWmsYh+ctWpBKgbmqes1slkHJ0sHLzbbWyOTcZev+a5Go4yRaXItu0BSpo= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fb53:: with SMTP id e19mr26570798vsr.10.1620743500618; Tue, 11 May 2021 07:31:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210326163732.763862-1-lance.richardson@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: <20210326163732.763862-1-lance.richardson@broadcom.com> From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:29 +0200 Message-ID: To: Declan Doherty , Pablo de Lara , Chas Williams , "humin (Q)" Cc: dev , dpdk stable , Lance Richardson Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] app/test: fix IPv6 header initialization 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 Sender: "dev" On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:37 PM Lance Richardson wrote: > > Fix two issues found when writing PMD unit tests for HW ptype and > L4 checksum offload: Would those unit tests be interesting to other pmd driver writers? > > - The version field in the IPv6 header was being set to zero, > which prevented hardware from recognizing it as IPv6. The > IP version field is now set to six. > - The payload_len field was being initialized using host byte > order, which (among other things) resulted in incorrect L4 > checksum computation. The payload_len field is now set using > network (big-endian) byte order. > > Fixes: 92073ef961ee ("bond: unit tests") Odd that this never got caught before, I guess nobody ran the bonding test with ipv6. Adding new maintainers for the bonding code since this helper is only used in the bonding ut. Should we take this in 21.05 or wait 21.08? > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Lance Richardson Reviewed-by: David Marchand -- David Marchand