From: Erhard Furtner <erhard_f@mailbox.org>
To: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Cc: "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: "test_ip_fast_csum: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/checksum_kunit.c:589" at boot with CONFIG_CHECKSUM_KUNIT=y enabled on a Talos II, kernel 6.8-rc5
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 12:37:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240223123713.2e49b981@yea> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2a7b678-fc59-4d12-acc3-696866cfd7c2@csgroup.eu>
On Fri, 23 Feb 2024 09:06:56 +0000
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu> wrote:
> Yes, with second patch is magically works, meaning the patch description
> is not correct because the problem for powerpc it not at all related to
> memory alignment but to endianness. And endianness should have been
> fixed by patch 1, but instead of it, patch 1 just hides the problem by
> forcing casts.
>
> The real fix for endianness which should be your patch 1 is the
> following change. With that change it works perfectly well without any
> forced cast:
>
> diff --git a/lib/checksum_kunit.c b/lib/checksum_kunit.c
> index 225bb7701460..bf70850035c7 100644
> --- a/lib/checksum_kunit.c
> +++ b/lib/checksum_kunit.c
> @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ static const u32 init_sums_no_overflow[] = {
> 0xffff0000, 0xfffffffb,
> };
>
> -static const __sum16 expected_csum_ipv6_magic[] = {
> +static const u16 expected_csum_ipv6_magic[] = {
> 0x18d4, 0x3085, 0x2e4b, 0xd9f4, 0xbdc8, 0x78f, 0x1034, 0x8422, 0x6fc0,
> 0xd2f6, 0xbeb5, 0x9d3, 0x7e2a, 0x312e, 0x778e, 0xc1bb, 0x7cf2, 0x9d1e,
> 0xca21, 0xf3ff, 0x7569, 0xb02e, 0xca86, 0x7e76, 0x4539, 0x45e3, 0xf28d,
> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ static const __sum16 expected_csum_ipv6_magic[] = {
> 0x3845, 0x1014
> };
>
> -static const __sum16 expected_fast_csum[] = {
> +static const u16 expected_fast_csum[] = {
> 0xda83, 0x45da, 0x4f46, 0x4e4f, 0x34e, 0xe902, 0xa5e9, 0x87a5, 0x7187,
> 0x5671, 0xf556, 0x6df5, 0x816d, 0x8f81, 0xbb8f, 0xfbba, 0x5afb, 0xbe5a,
> 0xedbe, 0xabee, 0x6aac, 0xe6b, 0xea0d, 0x67ea, 0x7e68, 0x8a7e, 0x6f8a,
> @@ -577,7 +577,8 @@ static void test_csum_no_carry_inputs(struct kunit
> *test)
>
> static void test_ip_fast_csum(struct kunit *test)
> {
> - __sum16 csum_result, expected;
> + __sum16 csum_result;
> + u16 expected;
>
> for (int len = IPv4_MIN_WORDS; len < IPv4_MAX_WORDS; len++) {
> for (int index = 0; index < NUM_IP_FAST_CSUM_TESTS; index++) {
> @@ -586,7 +587,7 @@ static void test_ip_fast_csum(struct kunit *test)
> expected_fast_csum[(len - IPv4_MIN_WORDS) *
> NUM_IP_FAST_CSUM_TESTS +
> index];
> - CHECK_EQ(expected, csum_result);
> + CHECK_EQ(to_sum16(expected), csum_result);
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -598,7 +599,7 @@ static void test_csum_ipv6_magic(struct kunit *test)
> const struct in6_addr *daddr;
> unsigned int len;
> unsigned char proto;
> - unsigned int csum;
> + __wsum csum;
>
> const int daddr_offset = sizeof(struct in6_addr);
> const int len_offset = sizeof(struct in6_addr) + sizeof(struct in6_addr);
> @@ -611,10 +612,10 @@ static void test_csum_ipv6_magic(struct kunit *test)
> saddr = (const struct in6_addr *)(random_buf + i);
> daddr = (const struct in6_addr *)(random_buf + i +
> daddr_offset);
> - len = *(unsigned int *)(random_buf + i + len_offset);
> + len = le32_to_cpu(*(__le32 *)(random_buf + i + len_offset));
> proto = *(random_buf + i + proto_offset);
> - csum = *(unsigned int *)(random_buf + i + csum_offset);
> - CHECK_EQ(expected_csum_ipv6_magic[i],
> + csum = *(__wsum *)(random_buf + i + csum_offset);
> + CHECK_EQ(to_sum16(expected_csum_ipv6_magic[i]),
> csum_ipv6_magic(saddr, daddr, len, proto, csum));
> }
> #endif /* !CONFIG_NET */
> ---
>
> Christophe
Your patch applied on top of 6.8-rc5 fixes the issue. Thanks!
And I take your remarks here as a hint for the other "drm_test_fb_xrgb8888_to_xrgb2101010 on Big Endian machines" issue I posted. ;) Let's see what I can do.
Regards,
Erhard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-23 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-23 1:26 "test_ip_fast_csum: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/checksum_kunit.c:589" at boot with CONFIG_CHECKSUM_KUNIT=y enabled on a Talos II, kernel 6.8-rc5 Erhard Furtner
2024-02-23 5:59 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-02-23 6:12 ` Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-23 6:58 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-02-23 7:00 ` Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-23 9:06 ` Christophe Leroy
2024-02-23 11:37 ` Erhard Furtner [this message]
2024-02-23 17:35 ` Charlie Jenkins
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=20240223123713.2e49b981@yea \
--to=erhard_f@mailbox.org \
--cc=charlie@rivosinc.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).