From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Lance Richardson <lance.richardson@broadcom.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] question regarding rx checksum offload flags
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 16:05:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200917140503.GS21395@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADyeNEDKjT5eKHYWvmag2-cc3xFmnpK8UkouauX57P-+DYA47w@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Lance,
On Mon, Aug 24, 2020 at 04:11:45PM -0400, Lance Richardson wrote:
> I was looking for some clarification regarding how rx checksum
> flags should be set for tunnel packets having both inner and outer
> IP/L4 headers.
>
> Based on comments in rte_mbuf_core.h, it seems to me. that the
> inner (encapsulated) IP header checksum status should determine
> which of these goes into ol_flags:
> PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_UNKNOWN
> PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_BAD
> PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_GOOD
> PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_NONE
>
> Similarly, the L4 checksum status should determine which of these
> goes into ol_flags:
> PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_UNKNOWN
> PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD
> PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_GOOD
> PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_NONE
>
> The IP header checksum status for the outer IP header should determine
> whether this flag is set in ol_flags:
> PKT_RX_EIP_CKSUM_BAD
>
> And for UDP-based tunnel encapsulations, the outer L4 checksum status
> should determine which of these goes into ol_flags:
> PKT_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_UNKNOWN
> PKT_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_BAD
> PKT_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_GOOD
> PKT_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_INVALID
>
> Finally, the checksum status of inner headers should have no influence
> on PKT_RX_EIP_CKSUM_BAD or PKT_RX_OUTER_L4_CKSUM_*, and
> likewise the checksum status of outer headers should have no influence
> on PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_* or PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_*.
>
> Is this correct? Apologies for such a basic question, but I'm having trouble
> correlating the above with implementations.
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Lance
The PKT_RX_EIP_CKSUM_BAD flag was added by these commits:
https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=c22265f6fd4cdcac9ee1b4970e4af8459d267516
https://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/commit/?id=d909af8f72ca3f8ab4fe1942abfb4f53e15ff8bc
First, to be honnest, I don't think this API is the right one. From a software
stack point of view, it would have been more logical to have PKT_RX_INNER_*
flags instead of outer.
That said, your understanding looks correct to me. I think this is the
expected behavior when the DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_OUTER* capability is enabled.
If the capability is not set, only the PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM* and
PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM* flags may be set, and they reference the first layer.
Regards,
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-17 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-24 20:11 [dpdk-dev] question regarding rx checksum offload flags Lance Richardson
2020-08-25 14:39 ` Lance Richardson
2020-08-26 13:39 ` Lance Richardson
2020-09-17 14:05 ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2020-12-14 17:41 ` Lance Richardson
2020-12-15 22:05 ` Lance Richardson
2020-12-18 9:27 ` Olivier Matz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200917140503.GS21395@platinum \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=lance.richardson@broadcom.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.