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 A6948A0A0E for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 996234003E; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:44 +0200 (CEST) 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 93DF14003E for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:43 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1620743502; 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=+FXZwFxxkASp4q1KhjBG78wYb2QhNER2WP/RVB+ab2o=; b=HX4qLoppE4zd6eXFWv+k9dB8bREUKLIwMbtxYhdluAbSxoH+JGUTfiQLRnKyFiV2ZPwMVv zEHqLNHa7TKJ8ujG98ZANyrHNuvPQ1qilpgGDM2+Cu7yzaOHe3isMC8JBBnVf197RjcbH6 M63yHu5wrFxgApQKDWd157HoSsIX3V0= 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-307-DwXv93hwMaSo5o-akRMNKw-1; Tue, 11 May 2021 10:31:41 -0400 X-MC-Unique: DwXv93hwMaSo5o-akRMNKw-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f199.google.com with SMTP id r10-20020a1fa80a0000b02901ebbe6c67c1so2531997vke.8 for ; Tue, 11 May 2021 07:31:41 -0700 (PDT) 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=+FXZwFxxkASp4q1KhjBG78wYb2QhNER2WP/RVB+ab2o=; b=NBhA+7Np0uSbYfzn+ZhaDbipsbEPIn0bNCtW8I7mAR64/9/bOYZHc+QaEX4UdPCf0D Ske4UHGhdFCb/q/Yky989VF319DB6uGEKU+WDxs/peelJ7ekbH+/xY09R3b2oc/mDRa0 49vGH0JiE/tKCK568J2Ktx2am6IhoAb81sGq0NqBItas7c43VAmerM9J09xHLG4gWabI z9eng73NOOdgXjPVhFVmKQh8TV7ZKhnuAFw7wm8pvVMgLfAo2/aMqDvHj8oVX8on+XWc KqHMtj6uT4lv2Ym8s461qb/3HW6T0iH12cYynPAF8agTziMjuklndMMsUJv8lLVUttGz 7Tag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533oDSt1YN9s3BeFvXILLoZqBpqiglS5KpVKPTlKBob/Bw9WxySN nmkJAM237H0CEUsEcEl8fiBDxQ3y4s5gwqvVoZuh+6VZbhVOeWHxBzGNnuAIcpLn8Z6B7MTfwHB v9fKkhKXDfFmsAsumr/WtIPs= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fb53:: with SMTP id e19mr26570834vsr.10.1620743500837; Tue, 11 May 2021 07:31:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzNZJIswQAFPnPeS2ECT5T9i5YMkpWmsYh+ctWpBKgbmqes1slkHJ0sHLzbbWyOTcZev+a5Go4yRaXItu0BSpo= X-Received: by 2002:a67:fb53:: with SMTP id e19mr26570798vsr.10.1620743500618; Tue, 11 May 2021 07:31:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210326163732.763862-1-lance.richardson@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: <20210326163732.763862-1-lance.richardson@broadcom.com> From: David Marchand Date: Tue, 11 May 2021 16:31:29 +0200 Message-ID: To: Declan Doherty , Pablo de Lara , Chas Williams , "humin (Q)" Cc: dev , dpdk stable , Lance Richardson 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-stable] [PATCH] app/test: fix IPv6 header initialization X-BeenThere: stable@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: patches for DPDK stable branches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: stable-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "stable" On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 5:37 PM Lance Richardson wrote: > > Fix two issues found when writing PMD unit tests for HW ptype and > L4 checksum offload: Would those unit tests be interesting to other pmd driver writers? > > - The version field in the IPv6 header was being set to zero, > which prevented hardware from recognizing it as IPv6. The > IP version field is now set to six. > - The payload_len field was being initialized using host byte > order, which (among other things) resulted in incorrect L4 > checksum computation. The payload_len field is now set using > network (big-endian) byte order. > > Fixes: 92073ef961ee ("bond: unit tests") Odd that this never got caught before, I guess nobody ran the bonding test with ipv6. Adding new maintainers for the bonding code since this helper is only used in the bonding ut. Should we take this in 21.05 or wait 21.08? > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Lance Richardson Reviewed-by: David Marchand -- David Marchand