From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <prvs=316b653de=franck.baudin@qosmos.com>
Received: from mc34.lon.server.colt.net (mc34.lon.server.colt.net
 [212.74.77.114]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B91A85907
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  3 Sep 2014 16:08:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mc34.lon.server.colt.net (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CD801A80DF
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  3 Sep 2014 14:12:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mx3.qosmos.com (unknown [195.68.92.43])
 by mc34.lon.server.colt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 409AD1A80DA
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  3 Sep 2014 14:12:57 +0000 (UTC)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,457,1406584800"; 
   d="scan'208";a="1215461"
Received: from unknown (HELO cercis.foret) ([10.10.2.42])
 by mx3.qosmos.com with ESMTP; 03 Sep 2014 16:12:56 +0200
Message-ID: <540721E8.2010307@qosmos.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 16:12:56 +0200
From: Franck Baudin <franck.baudin@qosmos.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Xie, Huawei" <huawei.xie@intel.com>, 
 "Gray, Mark D" <mark.d.gray@intel.com>,
 Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
References: <D84D5A6C1B26E448A0F35B539111D0E721D8C0@CAROUBIER.jungle.qosmos.com>
 <1686757.iSdNo6aMGt@xps13>
 <738D45BC1F695740A983F43CFE1B7EA92D72308F@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B0F284EE2@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <C37D651A908B024F974696C65296B57B0F284EE2@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-TM-AS-MML: No
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-8.2.0.1679-7.5.0.1018-20926.005
X-TM-AS-Result: No--12.495-5.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--12.495-5.0-31-10
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-8.2.0.1679-7.5.1018-20926.005
X-TMASE-Result: 10--12.495400-5.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: RsPxVIkBekwtjw5zGtj91Ca1MaKuob8PC/ExpXrHizw76rqmQGSwT/ea
 4uH4Y9hvWmBhIF8UJjOvWrz46u6NvagQOuSjPsjI9UVHiwLx0/Lv6kiVCTIVSh+ZGcvxEG4Eriu
 1vXYzMu3Ewh+FBAsuQdYqEHZrK4jXZvjinbSBPqFN3UUbIf4esiseSAhqf1rRAryv4ykUqLvi8r
 DiR1RMiMCzDTSJRy9CzWG6/aKyjXIVnLoTgKrjJnGBmLio+mJgloU71ctjXZQ3Z3efQH+wj0G4y
 8B4mD3lcex+cBH+RjeM58OQgF489I9oUcx9VMLgOX/V8P8ail1ZDL1gLmoa/PoA9r2LThYYKrau
 Xd3MZDVau/Gkfjk+cCgis7kmgcwR2gwW2oPIWw4eSZkag5aOyE7wSyZ+V/G6
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
 "dpdk-ovs@lists.01.org" <dpdk-ovs@lists.01.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Wrong TCP checksum of packets sent by Linux guest
 (virtIO/vhost)
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:08:20 -0000

Hi,

On 09/03/14 13:13, Xie, Huawei wrote:
> Looping in the dpdk-ovs list.
>
> * Does the new vhost API allow a user to know if all the relevant offloads have
> been
> turned on/off for that interface? It seems that this is possible through the
> virtio_net
> structure but it would be good to get some feedback from the relevant person
> working on DPDK (Huawei?).
>
> * If this is the case, then it is probably in the realm of the vswitch do the actual
> checksum (for VM-VM) or correctly configure the NIC when sending out through
> the physical interface.
>
> Comments?
>
> Mark:
> So far not supported. This is important as well in VxLan case. For the packet flow
> Guest A->  virtio -> ..->OVDK->.. -> Guest B.
> 1) If guest A and B are on different host machines, say A and B respectively,  and if the nic on A supports
> vxlan checksum offload, then both guest and host needn't generate checksum, the nic will
> generate checksum for both inner and outer packet.
> 2) In VM2VM case, as it is trusted communication channel, could we negotiate with the guest tcp stack not to verify checksum
> for received packet?
The problem is that any TCP packet send by a vanilla Linux guest through 
vhost is incorrect (VM to anything, including other colocalied VMs). In 
other words, the VM cannot use TCP. QEMU options and ethtool -K csum off 
tso off ("TCP stack negociation") have no effect, maybe because the 
vhost backend is misbehaving.

Franck