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 D5CCEA034F; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:55:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAD311607BD; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:54:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06E14406B4 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:54:56 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1614250496; 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=A7C0fVlr0O6VFAXyZaTzhtM++H8zJ3Z6SSxshusfW/Q=; b=U18ExSRzlkpljebNkVu/TTJsp9A4Wqaf3ZBx3smzd1oGlBleGngBwzXiu5dbcr8isfqZpA vQhVStMh8zhvz/0NMGBGpObBKUtAk4pkDMhlkMqq+Cp6LYV/ovREu2X+TcyNS18XJEh4Tq IQQs3R09BFDHjSNOG+wndqN5YMeCggw= Received: from mail-vk1-f199.google.com (mail-vk1-f199.google.com [209.85.221.199]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-565-1MlZiMy_PfqGQmq_7RdHjA-1; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 05:54:52 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 1MlZiMy_PfqGQmq_7RdHjA-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f199.google.com with SMTP id p71so901250vke.16 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 02:54:52 -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=A7C0fVlr0O6VFAXyZaTzhtM++H8zJ3Z6SSxshusfW/Q=; b=sKonhg0qQXONQXlNzENODq7K44svyb1eCl9Ychtm2owf5/2P+YaXUfXQpGs69fDzYA uXkuqtDG9p9BQWc9/+lN2M/kffUPgTM7if513OzDVId7H3ab2CGTWBnoLhXRNQo8u6i1 AINH1ZB8POfAJJWEu4tIVVEx2+pqqWwXE/UengghcVDWzDud9Hlzu8bC3Fcyodu4646X LbfKcRm+sf9/PeNWhDPQ958c96Y/0cM06/Qo0iDiG0LNmbARsczpVj3AjNyUpsYCK6Yl 3WYIGYT0ucG+S4GUSWcv9aCj09CqSJuoOJ1IvKaByA/9QqiZFf11Vho21haCzM43pjfN X8zw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530br0KLMyeq1bF5rLlXFAmV92ntLB0fVaMRCMA9yxpdPGC+Djm/ 3GlnHxsr80mKbLmWopQEkgSLaQBOXffPPHn8VDSylEe9v7WbZsC3RgTn//p9wABNuqmOOi6dm8d DasLW62ckDY7RSwezydw= X-Received: by 2002:a67:8b46:: with SMTP id n67mr1167516vsd.5.1614250492476; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 02:54:52 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw62px5VP32J54vE2fHpVoi5EDya50/Hi7CkWUMCbuSIG/Z1+Dm7jACjestos8LUsR1+Uqp7FGUdoynCkA0I5o= X-Received: by 2002:a67:8b46:: with SMTP id n67mr1167508vsd.5.1614250492238; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 02:54:52 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210202070652.145861-1-haiyue.wang@intel.com> <20210204143949.22827-1-haiyue.wang@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20210204143949.22827-1-haiyue.wang@intel.com> From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 11:54:41 +0100 Message-ID: To: Haiyue Wang Cc: dev , Paolo Valerio , Aaron Conole , Qi Zhang , Leyi Rong , "Tu, Lijuan" , "Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)" , Feifei Wang , dpdk stable , Jeff Guo , Bruce Richardson , Konstantin Ananyev , Van Haaren Harry , Thomas Monjalon 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] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH v3] 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" Hello Haiyue, On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 3:56 PM Haiyue Wang wrote: > > 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 There was a previous mention of this issue in the past and it resulted in dropping part of the hw statistics. https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=256ff05a9cae7484e2197cde4401dfa1f21d5a6f Does it make sense to restrict this "fix" to 82599 only? -- David Marchand