From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6B11A0524 for ; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:09:23 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22393C96E; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:09:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-vs1-f50.google.com (mail-vs1-f50.google.com [209.85.217.50]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 298F1C968 for ; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:09:21 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-vs1-f50.google.com with SMTP id m62so3371622vsd.3 for ; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:09:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0F3RPGB3DDR6i9mQgcFOV/90reiaFoPmVzOz4j6wS88=; b=DygI7jHGERAxKBURVz1l04O4qHQaovxSLkr/WCoCp4Y/HC+AnE+axRukynxW60PoZl VVZDrndE4HM9Ty+pmpifwbqKLS3RfJBIXatGHrGT4qB9yFlSCtpGdSA097ZmpF5KNyNg BwxNrZi2ATrN6ZQlmT7X/IVrOUsihGiyRQT0pfJhb+W8fN4j7ijCk6S0FWMnhTjb0YmR xdghubg5MZqlMAUA8BzNjomA6HKOCYVP8f/RmQqYUVvXUH8OUrGkPoes9PhaAYnUxDaI j6hDsv4KFdrLT338yVQOcjmETASjYk6KJlrWEfAcGc8vjD0IOu/ixqTj6IAwyb4+L+DX ixkQ== 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=0F3RPGB3DDR6i9mQgcFOV/90reiaFoPmVzOz4j6wS88=; b=HNq9lryZds6IlrgS5sBrisv4VQQaWeHi5XMiVvyWKzBgVBOrXxkR0+uw0t9zjARuWM Zg5/ERuxVVg6EnFK11ciko/6iHebNO9WnkUh1GylxghXBjpSdMYwOwuVM6PEDIVxD81r oM+r5pLPk/LZXcw+cr3WCXODBNdClt2evyh1JZVmMsGO4qUdAx9YVo824cuviM8yVF7m wdq5EMpzwhql1Jj/cCMK64EJsOTiv7JekL399REsmk4DaDnKecWfpsva5OMvjKO6M/tT pg/i892KA5/fyTOCU72njISyBJPZJq2FNcPvJGrC/e7PV5gbRS3tvaXKiEkUnhZ2LRWA tjJA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5326qhPtMUnRgoCKga6iK64X9GnC9KM7SsGFg17u1oRXYFzXLI6W qcKY5DFHqYdU2X6C1ZgDiLZ9HO/Cr/eq20xC8jY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJymJuk5sK3GXN7Jvyl3ylf5+zIyVyzpuOjlDYHlLaRCGt+kOVCEwFKm3urED85YKOoyFLLZHyHwLk+Ki+QsDZs= X-Received: by 2002:a67:42c3:: with SMTP id p186mr8716038vsa.30.1606525759534; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:09:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <735250132.1304895.1606493637100.ref@mail.yahoo.com> <735250132.1304895.1606493637100@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <735250132.1304895.1606493637100@mail.yahoo.com> From: Michael Barker Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 14:09:07 +1300 Message-ID: To: amit sehas Cc: "users@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] dpdk packet validation X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "users" If you can get a packet capture (e.g. from your switch), Wireshark can do checksum validation. It's normally disabled by default, but if you have a look through the Wireshark docs, there should be info on how to enable it. Regards, Michael Barker. On Sat, 28 Nov 2020 at 05:14, amit sehas wrote: > Is there some functionality that can validate packets in the same way that > NIC validates packets such as ip header checksum > validation etc? > > We are looking at some kind of bug in our code where we are exchanging > packets at a very low rate between two devices and > we can see that the packets are being sent from the port and are being > received by the destination port but they never make it > to the product ... which suggests that the NIC has dropped the packet ... > this could happen due to checksum failure or something > else ... > > earlier we had a bug which had a checksum failure and we had to fix it ... > is there some kind of API in linux which will allow > us to perform the same validation in s/w which is performed by the NIC in > h/w. > > any help is appreciated ... >