Messages in this thread | | | From | Marcin Wojtas <> | Date | Tue, 13 Apr 2021 11:59:11 +0200 | Subject | Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next] net: mvpp2: Add parsing support for different IPv4 IHL values |
| |
Hi Stefan,
wt., 13 kwi 2021 o 11:56 Stefan Chulski <stefanc@marvell.com> napisał(a): > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Russell King - ARM Linux admin <linux@armlinux.org.uk> > > > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 12:18 PM > > > To: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@marvell.com> > > > Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com; > > > davem@davemloft.net; Nadav Haklai <nadavh@marvell.com>; Yan > > Markman > > > <ymarkman@marvell.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > kuba@kernel.org; > > > mw@semihalf.com; andrew@lunn.ch; atenart@kernel.org; Liron Himi > > > <lironh@marvell.com>; Dana Vardi <danat@marvell.com> > > > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH net-next] net: mvpp2: Add parsing support > > > for different IPv4 IHL values > > > > > > External Email > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 11:45:31AM +0300, stefanc@marvell.com wrote: > > > > From: Stefan Chulski <stefanc@marvell.com> > > > > > > > > Add parser entries for different IPv4 IHL values. > > > > Each entry will set the L4 header offset according to the IPv4 IHL field. > > > > L3 header offset will set during the parsing of the IPv4 protocol. > > > > > > What is the impact of this commit? Is something broken at the moment, > > > if so what? Does this need to be backported to stable kernels? > > > > > > These are key questions, of which the former two should be covered in > > > every commit message so that the reason for the change can be known. > > > It's no good just describing what is being changed in the commit > > > without also describing why the change is being made. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > Due to missed parser support for IP header length > 20, RX IPv4 checksum > > offload fail. > > > > Regards. > > Currently driver set skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_NONE and checksum done by software. > So this just improve performance for packets with IP header length > 20. > IMO we can keep it in net-next. > > Stefan.
Please update the commit message in v2 with the explanation.
Also - is there an easy way to test it? L3 forwarding with forced header length?
Thanks, Marcin
| |