From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fan Du Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 0/5] pktgen IPsec support Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 16:56:24 +0800 Message-ID: <52AACBB8.4060009@windriver.com> References: <1386323614-5077-1-git-send-email-fan.du@windriver.com> <20131209.195854.223825767831436997.davem@davemloft.net> <52A66C0D.4050409@windriver.com> <20131209.202321.2134510956668375662.davem@davemloft.net> <52A86BBE.1090408@mojatatu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: David Miller , , To: Jamal Hadi Salim Return-path: Received: from mail1.windriver.com ([147.11.146.13]:47436 "EHLO mail1.windriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751957Ab3LMI4r (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Dec 2013 03:56:47 -0500 In-Reply-To: <52A86BBE.1090408@mojatatu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: =46WIW, I will follow Dave's suggestion not to touch your original support at the first place no matter how below answer looks like. On 2013=E5=B9=B412=E6=9C=8811=E6=97=A5 21:42, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote: > On 12/09/13 20:23, David Miller wrote: > >> Maybe they didn't care about the checksum being correct in the >> testbed they were using. > > Thats correct. The point is to exercise the crypto code. > Please dont change this. However exercising crypto engine on host running pktgen does *NOT* nece= ssary requiring bad IP checksum value and wrong total len value, because encr= yption has been done. I'm confused here with your test rationale, and what's wrong to use the right checksum/total length value? Please clear my puzzles. Thanks --=20 =E6=B5=AE=E6=B2=89=E9=9A=8F=E6=B5=AA=E5=8F=AA=E8=AE=B0=E4=BB=8A=E6=9C=9D= =E7=AC=91 --fan