From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D39A5A0A0E; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 09:32:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 651AA240462; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 09:32:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D0B8240461 for ; Wed, 3 Feb 2021 09:32:39 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1612341158; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=F8r/xIp0UJFDh0tpNAHIB91nr0VXXUJb1eLea7MqJYI=; b=MbSQ4LTmzihe/N4KH6jrypinps/Mbn7Pcqb20afn053pZtclLclc/PN8giDuCKkuq85aKt pniwue7rzm4x3XM+4Rb6OS2y3m1+IyjhhLCuv08hDg6Ra1j+BNJQokPyPKTpsrTDgk842z KZv/XTpKxRadnfbvXke3OUs48ktARsA= Received: from mail-vs1-f72.google.com (mail-vs1-f72.google.com [209.85.217.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-312-_FWqKZfEPzWJvN_3Id9FOA-1; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 03:32:37 -0500 X-MC-Unique: _FWqKZfEPzWJvN_3Id9FOA-1 Received: by mail-vs1-f72.google.com with SMTP id k20so3609996vsm.21 for ; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 00:32:36 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=F8r/xIp0UJFDh0tpNAHIB91nr0VXXUJb1eLea7MqJYI=; b=ql5AVtBTvWl3IsbyPAKkvOCVtAq+/9iWVN1V6ttXw36GxGAqquP/BSM98PbK3U/2Tf PCYCeZuM35tNJxaI4aH2M7Q2rk/NhUvkPTpdVDIVUzj/xB935nLPHS/OpDQ6+3pS+jVl zKY/ncIjuslHeBO4lyn+xfGrYGDGz8RHybNoHnZgB/S71pvOEqLY74WBtAfpx5cvrIGG +Pp9UPiLCpNGcwKzLS//yZlut/DXjylkrVblkLBEfrWdj+z3qos6jyD0nw+5iFYfanNr VV3Kkpmq3fN0VuYkkHNLuQWqzVil6tTnhOqVrAnhlKCyWTuRtz6T3X7+lALGEeP6DZ48 QZyg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533xvZfFwHPZjvXwKCRBrbfiCJ7gll/RlhtcXfsqM5ymVwkvV7se qBpnKt5SIPiryJX52v+vUs1gh93u57ny2m3N5yB+NcMBaSdD/AHjVlJpknaj6ozB540E35YQTVB SR13YgwZh0qgL4KscqXQ= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:310a:: with SMTP id e10mr1131852ual.126.1612341155674; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 00:32:35 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGa/WJTlXOOmGdl0POGf/oAE57DuSljhjfQSxDr1p6Bztpu74alNkH25jZ30mazG3VRODShsH06pSQjT1cDyk= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:310a:: with SMTP id e10mr1131834ual.126.1612341155474; Wed, 03 Feb 2021 00:32:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210202070652.145861-1-haiyue.wang@intel.com> <20210203021922.16164-1-haiyue.wang@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 09:32:24 +0100 Message-ID: To: "Zhang, Qi Z" Cc: "Wang, Haiyue" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "pvalerio@redhat.com" , "aconole@redhat.com" , "Rong, Leyi" , "Tu, Lijuan" , "Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com" , "Feifei.Wang2@arm.com" , "stable@dpdk.org" , "Guo, Jia" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: fix UDP zero checksum error X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 9:07 AM Zhang, Qi Z wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wang, Haiyue > > Sent: Wednesday, February 3, 2021 10:19 AM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Cc: pvalerio@redhat.com; aconole@redhat.com; > > david.marchand@redhat.com; Zhang, Qi Z ; Rong, Leyi > > ; Tu, Lijuan ; > > Ruifeng.Wang@arm.com; Feifei.Wang2@arm.com; Wang, Haiyue > > ; stable@dpdk.org; Guo, Jia ; > > Richardson, Bruce ; Ananyev, Konstantin > > > > Subject: [PATCH v2] net/ixgbe: fix UDP zero checksum error > > > > There is an 82599 errata that UDP frames with a zero checksum are incorrectly > > marked as checksum invalid by the hardware. This was leading to misleading > > PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD flag. > > > > This patch changes the bad UDP checksum to PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_UNKNOWN, > > so the software application will then have to recompute the checksum itself if > > needed. > > > > Bugzilla ID: 629 > > > > Fixes: af75078fece3 ("first public release") > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > > > Reported-by: Paolo Valerio > > Signed-off-by: Haiyue Wang > > Applied to dpdk-next-net-intel. Why the rush for applying? The ARM part is not done, Paolo said he would test the patch and I am pretty sure a review can't hurt. -- David Marchand