From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124])
by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6FD343C11;
Wed, 28 Feb 2024 03:27:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67B1040DF5;
Wed, 28 Feb 2024 03:27:48 +0100 (CET)
Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190])
by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DA654027D
for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 03:27:46 +0100 (CET)
Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.88.163])
by szxga04-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4Tkyr92YKvz2Bdrd;
Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:25:29 +0800 (CST)
Received: from dggpeml500011.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.185.36.84])
by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14AB718002F;
Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:27:44 +0800 (CST)
Received: from [10.67.121.193] (10.67.121.193) by
dggpeml500011.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.84) with Microsoft SMTP Server
(version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id
15.1.2507.35; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:27:43 +0800
Message-ID: <7e376ab0-67a0-4a3c-a528-7928077e7b56@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 10:27:43 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/hns3: fix Rx packet truncation when KEEP CRC enabled
Content-Language: en-US
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>, Jie Hai <haijie1@huawei.com>,
<dev@dpdk.org>
CC: <lihuisong@huawei.com>, <fengchengwen@huawei.com>, <liuyonglong@huawei.com>
References: <20240206011030.2007689-1-haijie1@huawei.com>
<11b8feac-4a9e-4d2c-8995-ed492d684750@amd.com>
<7438563e-c7b4-6e13-68bf-74ff423546af@huawei.com>
<6246e1f8-dcd4-468d-a05d-2e292f6e1714@amd.com>
<6c831a66-f916-48d4-68d9-4c3bcfcb4979@huawei.com>
<1ec105cf-c8d2-4010-867d-30970c25a2a1@amd.com>
From: huangdengdui <huangdengdui@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <1ec105cf-c8d2-4010-867d-30970c25a2a1@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.67.121.193]
X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems704-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.181) To
dggpeml500011.china.huawei.com (7.185.36.84)
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>,
<mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
On 2024/2/27 0:43, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 2/26/2024 3:16 AM, Jie Hai wrote:
>> On 2024/2/23 21:53, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>> On 2/20/2024 3:58 AM, Jie Hai wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If so I missed why mbuf 'pkt_len' and 'data_len' reduced by
>>> 'rxq->crc_len', can you please explain what above lines does?
>>>
>>>
>> @@ -2470,8 +2523,7 @@ hns3_recv_pkts_simple(void *rx_queue,
>> rxdp->rx.bd_base_info = 0;
>>
>> rxm->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;
>> - rxm->pkt_len = (uint16_t)(rte_le_to_cpu_16(rxd.rx.pkt_len)) -
>> - rxq->crc_len;
>> + rxm->pkt_len = rte_le_to_cpu_16(rxd.rx.pkt_len);
>>
>> In the previous code above, the 'pkt_len' is set to the length obtained
>> from the BD. the length obtained from the BD already contains CRC length.
>> But as you said above, the DPDK requires that the length of the mbuf
>> does not contain CRC length . So we subtract 'rxq->crc_len' from
>> mbuf'pkt_len' and 'data_len'. This patch doesn't change the logic, it
>> just moves the code around.
>>
>
> Nope, I am not saying mbuf length shouldn't contain CRC length, indeed
> it is other way around and this is our confusion.
>
> CRC length shouldn't be in the statistics, I mean in received bytes stats.
> Assume that received packet is 128 bytes and we know it has the CRC,
> Rx received bytes stat should be 124 (rx_bytes = 128 - CRC = 124)
>
> But mbuf->data_len & mbuf->pkt_len should have full frame length,
> including CRC.
>
> As application explicitly requested to KEEP CRC, it will know last 4
> bytes are CRC.
> Anything after 'mbuf->data_len' in the mbuf buffer is not valid, so if
> you reduce 'mbuf->data_len' by CRC size, application can't know if 4
> bytes after 'mbuf->data_len' is valid CRC or not.
>
I agree with you.
But the implementation of other PMDs supported KEEP_CRC is like this.
In addition, there are probably many users that are already using it.
If we modify it, it may cause applications incompatible.
what do you think?