DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Pfeiffer <michael.pfeiffer@tu-ilmenau.de>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/tap: Allow all-zero checksum for UDP over IPv4
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:23:09 +0100
Message-ID: <23c6f497eb31840f0a2260bb3b5521fba8c7ec3b.camel@tu-ilmenau.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <da91fcbd-32d5-c7ad-67cb-322c74b3e767@intel.com>

Hi,

On Tue, 2020-11-10 at 15:59 +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 11/9/2020 2:22 PM, Michael Pfeiffer wrote:
> > Unlike TCP, UDP checksums are optional and may be zero to indicate "not
> > set" [RFC 768] (except for IPv6, where this prohibited [RFC 8200]). Add
> > this special case to the checksum offload emulation in net/tap.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Pfeiffer <michael.pfeiffer@tu-ilmenau.de>
> > ---
> >   drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c | 13 +++++++++++--
> >   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> > index 2f8abb12c..e486b41c5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/tap/rte_eth_tap.c
> > @@ -303,6 +303,7 @@ tap_verify_csum(struct rte_mbuf *mbuf)
> >         uint16_t cksum = 0;
> >         void *l3_hdr;
> >         void *l4_hdr;
> > +       struct rte_udp_hdr *udp_hdr;
> >   
> >         if (l2 == RTE_PTYPE_L2_ETHER_VLAN)
> >                 l2_len += 4;
> > @@ -349,10 +350,18 @@ tap_verify_csum(struct rte_mbuf *mbuf)
> >                 /* Don't verify checksum for multi-segment packets. */
> >                 if (mbuf->nb_segs > 1)
> >                         return;
> > -               if (l3 == RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4)
> > +               if (l3 == RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4) {
> > +                       if (l4 == RTE_PTYPE_L4_UDP) {
> > +                               udp_hdr = (struct rte_udp_hdr *)l4_hdr;
> > +                               if (udp_hdr->dgram_cksum == 0) {
> 
> Overall patch looks good to me, but can you please add a comment on top of
> above 
> check to describe why checksum can be zero, as done in the commit log.

Sure, I will update the patch. I am also not completely sure whether
PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_NONE is the right flag for this case (rather than _UNKNOWN).
From rte_core_mbuf.h:

 * - PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_UNKNOWN: no information about the RX L4 checksum
 * - PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_NONE: the L4 checksum is not correct in the packet
 *   data, but the integrity of the L4 data is verified.

The second part after the "but" is not really the case here. I don't know how
relevant the distinction is, as most application side code will probably only
do something like

if ((mbuf->ol_flags & PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_MASK) == PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD)
	rte_pktmbuf_free(mbuf);

anyway. Do you have any opinions on that?

> > +                                       mbuf->ol_flags |=
> > PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_NONE;
> > +                                       return;
> > +                               }
> > +                       }
> >                         cksum = ~rte_ipv4_udptcp_cksum(l3_hdr, l4_hdr);
> > -               else if (l3 == RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6)
> > +               } else if (l3 == RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6) {
> >                         cksum = ~rte_ipv6_udptcp_cksum(l3_hdr, l4_hdr);
> > +               }
> >                 mbuf->ol_flags |= cksum ?
> >                         PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD :
> >                         PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_GOOD;
> > 
> 

Regards
Michael


  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-11  7:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-09 14:22 Michael Pfeiffer
2020-11-10 14:46 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-10 15:56   ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-10 16:01   ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-10 17:42     ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-11  7:06       ` Morten Brørup
2020-11-10 15:59 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-11  7:23   ` Michael Pfeiffer [this message]
2020-11-11  9:31     ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-13 13:02       ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-13 14:03         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Michael Pfeiffer
2020-11-13 14:49           ` Ferruh Yigit

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=23c6f497eb31840f0a2260bb3b5521fba8c7ec3b.camel@tu-ilmenau.de \
    --to=michael.pfeiffer@tu-ilmenau.de \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=keith.wiles@intel.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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git