From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Kirsher Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2016 13:15:22 -0800 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [net PATCH 0/2] Don't use lco_csum to compute IPv4 checksum In-Reply-To: <20161130.094746.724735454244491985.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20161128153927.15466.99193.stgit@ahduyck-blue-test.jf.intel.com> <20161130.094746.724735454244491985.davem@davemloft.net> Message-ID: <1480540522.2377.18.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: On Wed, 2016-11-30 at 09:47 -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Alexander Duyck > Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 10:42:18 -0500 > > > When I implemented the GSO partial support in the Intel drivers I was > using > > lco_csum to compute the checksum that we needed to plug into the IPv4 > > checksum field in order to cancel out the data that was not a part of > the > > IPv4 header.? However this didn't take into account that the transport > > offset might be pointing to the inner transport header. > >? > > Instead of using lco_csum I have just coded around it so that we can > use > > the outer IP header plus the IP header length to determine where we > need to > > start our checksum and then just call csum_partial ourselves. > >? > > This should fix the SIT issue reported on igb interfaces as well as > simliar > > issues that would pop up on other Intel NICs. > > Jeff, are you going to send me a pull request with this stuff or would > you be OK with my applying these directly to 'net'? Go ahead and apply those to your net tree, I do not want to hold this up. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: