From: Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: <lihuisong@huawei.com>, <fengchengwen@huawei.com>,
<liuyonglong@huawei.com>, <huangdengdui@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/hns3: fix Rx packet truncation when KEEP CRC enabled
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 11:58:57 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7438563e-c7b4-6e13-68bf-74ff423546af@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <11b8feac-4a9e-4d2c-8995-ed492d684750@amd.com>
Hi, Ferruh,
Thanks for your review.
On 2024/2/7 22:15, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 2/6/2024 1:10 AM, Jie Hai wrote:
>> From: Dengdui Huang <huangdengdui@huawei.com>
>>
>> When KEEP_CRC offload is enabled, some packets will be truncated and
>> the CRC is still be stripped in following cases:
>> 1. For HIP08 hardware, the packet type is TCP and the length
>> is less than or equal to 60B.
>> 2. For other hardwares, the packet type is IP and the length
>> is less than or equal to 60B.
>>
>
> If a device doesn't support the offload by some packets, it can be
> option to disable offload for that device, instead of calculating it in
> software and append it.
The KEEP CRC feature of hns3 is faulty only in the specific packet
type and small packet(<60B) case.
What's more, the small ethernet packet is not common.
> Unless you have a specific usecase, or requirement to support the offload.
Yes, some users of hns3 are already using this feature.
So we cannot drop this offload
> <...>
>
>> @@ -2492,10 +2544,16 @@ hns3_recv_pkts_simple(void *rx_queue,
>> goto pkt_err;
>>
>> rxm->packet_type = hns3_rx_calc_ptype(rxq, l234_info, ol_info);
>> -
>> if (rxm->packet_type == RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER_TIMESYNC)
>> rxm->ol_flags |= RTE_MBUF_F_RX_IEEE1588_PTP;
>>
>> + if (unlikely(rxq->crc_len > 0)) {
>> + if (hns3_need_recalculate_crc(rxq, rxm))
>> + hns3_recalculate_crc(rxq, rxm);
>> + rxm->pkt_len -= rxq->crc_len;
>> + rxm->data_len -= rxq->crc_len;
>>
>
> Removing 'crc_len' from 'mbuf->pkt_len' & 'mbuf->data_len' is
> practically same as stripping CRC.
>
> We don't count CRC length in the statistics, but it should be accessible
> in the payload by the user.
Our drivers are behaving exactly as you say.
>
> .
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-20 3:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-06 1:10 Jie Hai
2024-02-07 14:15 ` Ferruh Yigit
2024-02-20 3:58 ` Jie Hai [this message]
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
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=7438563e-c7b4-6e13-68bf-74ff423546af@huawei.com \
--to=haijie1@huawei.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
--cc=huangdengdui@huawei.com \
--cc=lihuisong@huawei.com \
--cc=liuyonglong@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).