From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>,
Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 1/5] netlink: specs: Add XDP RX checksum capability to XDP metadata specs
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 17:41:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250926174118.23a054a7@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0608935c-1c1c-4374-a058-bc78d114c630@kernel.org>
On Fri, 26 Sep 2025 11:53:25 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> What do people think: Do we leave it as an exercise to the BPF-developer
> to deduct hardware detected a wrong/failed checksum, as that is possible
> as described above. Or do we introduce a CHECKSUM_FAILED?
I vote we leave it unless someone has a strong use case for FAILED.
Checksumming and dropping packets should be pretty cheap, it's not
worth complicating the stack with another option.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>,
Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 1/5] netlink: specs: Add XDP RX checksum capability to XDP metadata specs
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2025 17:41:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250926174118.23a054a7@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0608935c-1c1c-4374-a058-bc78d114c630@kernel.org>
On Fri, 26 Sep 2025 11:53:25 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> What do people think: Do we leave it as an exercise to the BPF-developer
> to deduct hardware detected a wrong/failed checksum, as that is possible
> as described above. Or do we introduce a CHECKSUM_FAILED?
I vote we leave it unless someone has a strong use case for FAILED.
Checksumming and dropping packets should be pretty cheap, it's not
worth complicating the stack with another option.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-27 0:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-25 9:30 [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 0/5] Add the the capability to load HW RX checsum in eBPF programs Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 1/5] netlink: specs: Add XDP RX checksum capability to XDP metadata specs Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-26 4:20 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2025-09-26 4:20 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Stanislav Fomichev
2025-09-26 8:59 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2025-09-26 8:59 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2025-09-26 22:53 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2025-09-26 22:53 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Stanislav Fomichev
2026-02-10 17:26 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2026-02-10 17:26 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2026-02-12 1:57 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2026-02-12 1:57 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Stanislav Fomichev
2026-02-12 16:51 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2026-02-12 16:51 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2026-02-13 5:16 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2026-02-13 5:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Stanislav Fomichev
2026-02-13 15:19 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2026-02-13 15:19 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-26 9:53 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2025-09-26 9:53 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2025-09-27 0:35 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-09-27 0:35 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2025-09-27 0:41 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2025-09-27 0:41 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 2/5] net: veth: Add xmo_rx_checksum callback to veth driver Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 3/5] net: ice: Add xmo_rx_checksum callback Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 4/5] selftests/bpf: Add selftest support for bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_checksum Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 5/5] selftests/bpf: Add bpf_xdp_metadata_rx_checksum support to xdp_hw_metadat prog Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:30 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 9:51 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v2 0/5] Add the the capability to load HW RX checsum in eBPF programs Jakub Sitnicki
2025-09-25 9:51 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Sitnicki
2025-09-25 10:39 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 10:39 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-25 10:58 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2025-09-25 10:58 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Sitnicki
2025-09-26 11:45 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2025-09-26 11:45 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2025-09-26 11:58 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2025-09-26 11:58 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Sitnicki
2025-09-26 12:55 ` Lorenzo Bianconi
2025-09-26 12:55 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Lorenzo Bianconi
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=20250926174118.23a054a7@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=aleksander.lobakin@intel.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=donald.hunter@gmail.com \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo@kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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.