From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier MATZ Subject: Re: about rx checksum flags Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 21:11:59 +0200 Message-ID: <574DE1FF.6060402@6wind.com> References: <574C5B9D.4080006@6wind.com> <20160531080916.GI5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Richardson, Bruce" , Adrien Mazarguil , "Tan, Jianfeng" To: Yuanhan Liu Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (mail-wm0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C7B37B0 for ; Tue, 31 May 2016 21:12:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id n129so147898875wmn.1 for ; Tue, 31 May 2016 12:12:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160531080916.GI5641@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 05/31/2016 10:09 AM, Yuanhan Liu wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 05:26:21PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote: >> PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_NONE: the L4 checksum is not correct in the packet >> data, but the integrity of the L4 header is verified. >> -> the application can process the packet but must not verify the >> checksum by sw. It has to take care to recalculate the cksum >> if the packet is transmitted (either by sw or using tx offload) > > I like the explanation you made at [1] better :) > > So in general, I think this proposal is good to have. Thanks everyone for your feedback. I'll try to send a first patch proposition soon. Regards, Olivier