From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BCBA1B589 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 04:47:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19BAC144D; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 22:47:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 18 Dec 2018 22:47:58 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=4jMr1AfeAZ9N76IdpUcDTL6TRCbkngXh/jP9b9w92MY=; b=Iofr0VfeCBPN qaBIvMqswwUlEPrSqkd6Wwb0572wJSUmJ8nNUmfZ2QOxUquondj3UZS7siCU+n08 c71r0cnhC1wp51wvWGXVOKXv8+ykO+eSZsaVUd21jWqdqeUQqooUiR/TkiW/nq0l MxGFHeNNaUxCQ3dyObirJba1mPg4aQI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=4jMr1AfeAZ9N76IdpUcDTL6TRCbkngXh/jP9b9w92 MY=; b=PEmZexPkbei1gbIy6RN0mMo05FSVZKvHdDktbFc6oosU2757ZHlqjVb/U +kmcfIFQKMgJRzWUAJde4bLE8r9SSN+UC4w7dzkui+tYoh5+awg7AwLe5xPcgOKo Vvmm85xJN43Icgs4dz7PA8Mmy3AhLMr9H+s832jNSoAXapC8FFyAaPEnp3lfkS4T 76lyXBVjWFYLngDEuai2o/37cRstg33qEVKcstraSWGgKQPFlxDErrG5ghIG02Gp PgkxM7d398oMWCevajZNDO4VsBp6sn/tQ9htGcQJcz/5oeSgZaHaftePLBPa4ycF aSHaXiBXh4Re+eS08OhLq2QDmt9CQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtkedrudeiledgfeefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfquhhtnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucef tddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefhvffufffkjg hfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcu oehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtd efrddukeegnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghl ohhnrdhnvghtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgepud X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4706F100BB; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 22:47:56 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: konstantin.ananyev@intel.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Luca Boccassi , Chas Williams <3chas3@gmail.com>, Chas Williams Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 04:47:55 +0100 Message-ID: <73581454.Bm8E9NaT8G@xps> In-Reply-To: <1543400103.5087.14.camel@debian.org> References: <20181127045613.16437-1-3chas3@gmail.com> <1543400103.5087.14.camel@debian.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ip_frag: fix ipv6 when MTU sizes not aligned to 8 bytes X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 03:47:59 -0000 28/11/2018 11:15, Luca Boccassi: > On Mon, 2018-11-26 at 23:56 -0500, Chas Williams wrote: > > From: Chas Williams > > > > The same issue was fixed on for the ipv4 version of this routine in > > commit 8d4d3a4f7337 ("ip_frag: handle MTU sizes not aligned to 8 > > bytes"). > > Briefly, the size of an ipv6 header is always 40 bytes. With an MTU > > of > > 1500, this will never produce a multiple of 8 bytes for the frag_size > > and this routine can never succeed. Since RTE_ASSERTS are disabled by > > default, this failure is tpyically ignored. > > > > To fix this, round down to the nearest 8 bytes and use this when > > producing the fragments. > > > > Fixes: 0aa31d7a5929 ("ip_frag: add IPv6 fragmentation support") > > > > Signed-off-by: Chas Williams > > --- > > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ip_frag.h | 1 + > > lib/librte_ip_frag/rte_ipv6_fragmentation.c | 18 +++++++++++------- > > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > Acked-by: Luca Boccassi Konstantin, no comment?