RE: patch 'net/ena: fix bad checksum handling' has been queued to stable release 21.11.8

["Brandes, Shai" <shaibran@amazon.com>]

Hi Kevin, 

I think there is one net/ena patch that was not picked up for the stable release (likely since there are two patches with similar title).
I would appreciate if you could verify.

The missing patch: net/ena: fix wrong handling of checksum
see patchwork https://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20240702144626.14545-14-shaibran@amazon.com/

All the best,
Shai Brandes
ENA drivers team

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2024 7:19 PM
> To: Brandes, Shai <shaibran@amazon.com>
> Cc: dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] patch 'net/ena: fix bad checksum handling' has been
> queued to stable release 21.11.8
> 
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click
> links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the
> content is safe.
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> FYI, your patch has been queued to stable release 21.11.8
> 
> Note it hasn't been pushed to http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable yet.
> It will be pushed if I get no objections before 08/28/24. So please shout if
> anyone has objections.
> 
> Also note that after the patch there's a diff of the upstream commit vs the
> patch applied to the branch. This will indicate if there was any rebasing
> needed to apply to the stable branch. If there were code changes for
> rebasing
> (ie: not only metadata diffs), please double check that the rebase was
> correctly done.
> 
> Queued patches are on a temporary branch at:
> https://github.com/kevintraynor/dpdk-stable
> 
> This queued commit can be viewed at:
> https://github.com/kevintraynor/dpdk-
> stable/commit/082bd6be7b93ae090f2bdcc55fddc48c3bf16c2f
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Kevin
> 
> ---
> From 082bd6be7b93ae090f2bdcc55fddc48c3bf16c2f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> 2001
> From: Shai Brandes <shaibran@amazon.com>
> Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 17:46:22 +0300
> Subject: [PATCH] net/ena: fix bad checksum handling
> 
> [ upstream commit fa4bb7025255036fcff9556c637efa2627ac4af4 ]
> 
> Removed a workaround for a false L4 bad Rx csum indication from the
> device. The workaround was to set it as unknown so the application would
> check it instead.
> The issue was fixed in the device, thus the driver bad csum handling should
> be fixed in the PMD.
> 
> Fixes: b2d2f1cf89a6 ("net/ena: fix checksum flag for L4")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shai Brandes <shaibran@amazon.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c | 8 +-------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
> index 1c61f793e6..84c41f1b9d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
> @@ -311,11 +311,5 @@ static inline void ena_rx_mbuf_prepare(struct
> rte_mbuf *mbuf,
>         else
>                 if (unlikely(ena_rx_ctx->l4_csum_err))
> -                       /*
> -                        * For the L4 Rx checksum offload the HW may indicate
> -                        * bad checksum although it's valid. Because of that,
> -                        * we're setting the UNKNOWN flag to let the app
> -                        * re-verify the checksum.
> -                        */
> -                       ol_flags |= RTE_MBUF_F_RX_L4_CKSUM_UNKNOWN;
> +                       ol_flags |= RTE_MBUF_F_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD;
>                 else
>                         ol_flags |= RTE_MBUF_F_RX_L4_CKSUM_GOOD;
> --
> 2.46.0
> 
> ---
>   Diff of the applied patch vs upstream commit (please double-check if non-
> empty:
> ---
> --- -   2024-08-23 17:18:12.913173354 +0100
> +++ 0109-net-ena-fix-bad-checksum-handling.patch        2024-08-23
> 17:18:09.849430556 +0100
> @@ -1 +1 @@
> -From fa4bb7025255036fcff9556c637efa2627ac4af4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> +From 082bd6be7b93ae090f2bdcc55fddc48c3bf16c2f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> 2001
> @@ -5,0 +6,2 @@
> +[ upstream commit fa4bb7025255036fcff9556c637efa2627ac4af4 ]
> +
> @@ -13 +14,0 @@
> -Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> @@ -21 +22 @@
> -index 4e7171e629..b43b913903 100644
> +index 1c61f793e6..84c41f1b9d 100644
> @@ -24,3 +25,3 @@
> -@@ -675,11 +675,5 @@ static inline void ena_rx_mbuf_prepare(struct
> ena_ring *rx_ring,
> -               if (unlikely(ena_rx_ctx->l4_csum_err)) {
> -                       ++rx_stats->l4_csum_bad;
> +@@ -311,11 +311,5 @@ static inline void ena_rx_mbuf_prepare(struct
> rte_mbuf *mbuf,
> +       else
> +               if (unlikely(ena_rx_ctx->l4_csum_err))
> @@ -35,2 +36,2 @@
> -               } else {
> -                       ++rx_stats->l4_csum_good;
> +               else
> +                       ol_flags |= RTE_MBUF_F_RX_L4_CKSUM_GOOD;