From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (mail-wm0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C7B37B0 for ; Tue, 31 May 2016 21:12:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id n129so147898875wmn.1 for ; Tue, 31 May 2016 12:12:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Es7mxj8HEpdU/815bQ/ZoiyZsPHsN6S8GpTGAr/3tJU=; b=IEzIWzAHpddP32JNIy1LIPvCGRHtjpxgBKKi7lYT7uG2WIa0HsthVF6O6qg03Bf4qo w5rwwSZOBKRAxB7q0NVcytWRKRgqgEedm8w7JwD+THPS+UkxTRRsjCZJj0HN8VOhzdJA aWhoSnPVqqVtqherYYtxtFdvFh7r8xFQijr1ycpirpi5Iz4qwY3WpH5v+59ir1czFYqQ pjBczVv/I93LZXIuVELb0NWlpQBtwb1E7FAwF2ioBJHxt7w6xZoTKmsyKbIYqGto4MnB pXOc5APQY7bG2v5imR8MlN52djv0Drr63n+YFxSIu40sA43vxRbR9UozMb4aIqXgz5sT mo7w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Es7mxj8HEpdU/815bQ/ZoiyZsPHsN6S8GpTGAr/3tJU=; b=BdSvzy6udRMg41G4IZM4arDAYxu0ch6HX5YqSa3cqMjFqzxXyAuSc7PNJnKDbCr7Jw cYTPN3x78zO8dz8tWWoDEWDC+B4o5Cu0ouerrYPEC9FkN7JZ+3iM94iwOzGUdIGVIELO ZEVu8Py27Hmj7NwM8NwwEqWetl9jZsokyZzC9z/Nqa7ZhtP65YFkxE1sLlGRdn9f5Lpn Wf9t+v1EdILwJdPnn951eWEyfwa3/ENCGQKuaOwh66D7weSM8/yZSbiKbTWLfqIEcGVj vU+pyR41vqsqv7F/l6zJm3uyLRP2AGPuIm7gY+JRFcFOpFCbOaZWbHSg1L3Og4omqifV Ueqw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIBDMQPmxa5sy79AHKYCpvjgexUZZsfR1f5gWjEx/7wGWtNYHI+SCVCI+6hJt0LWUEH X-Received: by 10.194.141.144 with SMTP id ro16mr36529004wjb.40.1464721922170; Tue, 31 May 2016 12:12:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.16] (85-171-34-230.rev.numericable.fr. [85.171.34.230]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r3sm27020552wme.24.2016.05.31.12.12.00 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 31 May 2016 12:12:01 -0700 (PDT) To: Yuanhan Liu References: <574C5B9D.4080006@6wind.com> <20160531080916.GI5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Richardson, Bruce" , Adrien Mazarguil , "Tan, Jianfeng" From: Olivier MATZ Message-ID: <574DE1FF.6060402@6wind.com> Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 21:11:59 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160531080916.GI5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] about rx checksum flags X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 19:12:02 -0000 On 05/31/2016 10:09 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 05:26:21PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: >> PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_NONE: the L4 checksum is not correct in the packet >> data, but the integrity of the L4 header is verified. >> -> the application can process the packet but must not verify the >> checksum by sw. It has to take care to recalculate the cksum >> if the packet is transmitted (either by sw or using tx offload) > > I like the explanation you made at [1] better :) > > So in general, I think this proposal is good to have. Thanks everyone for your feedback. I'll try to send a first patch proposition soon. Regards, Olivier