From: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] lib: checksum: Use aligned accesses for ip_fast_csum and csum_ipv6_magic tests
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 13:09:29 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zcpe2ZthpFf1BVGg@ghost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <52393411-8313-4e94-9618-916b57f7d52e@roeck-us.net>
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 09:18:14AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 06:26:14AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 07, 2024 at 04:22:51PM -0800, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > > + struct csum_ipv6_magic_data {
> > > + const struct in6_addr saddr;
> > > + const struct in6_addr daddr;
> > > + unsigned int len;
> > > + __wsum csum;
> > > + unsigned char proto;
> > > + } data, *data_ptr;
> >
> > Huh?
> >
> > > + int num_tests = MAX_LEN / WORD_ALIGNMENT - sizeof(struct csum_ipv6_magic_data);
> > > +
> > > + for (int i = 0; i < num_tests; i++) {
> > > + data_ptr = (struct csum_ipv6_magic_data *)(random_buf + (i * WORD_ALIGNMENT));
> > > +
> > > + cpu_to_be32_array((__be32 *)&data.saddr, (const u32 *)&data_ptr->saddr,
> > > + sizeof_field(struct csum_ipv6_magic_data, saddr) / 4);
> > > + cpu_to_be32_array((__be32 *)&data.daddr, (const u32 *)&data_ptr->daddr,
> > > + sizeof_field(struct csum_ipv6_magic_data, daddr) / 4);
> > > + data.len = data_ptr->len;
> > > + data.csum = (__force __wsum)htonl((__force u32)data_ptr->csum);
> >
> > What are those cpu_to_be32() about? Checksum calculations *DO* *NOT* involve
> > any endianness conversions. At any point.
> >
> > Replace those assignments with memcpy() and be done with that - that will take
> > care of unaligned accesses.
> >
> > Result will have host-independent memory representation. The only place where you
> > might want to play with byteswaps (only 16-bit ones) is if you initialized the
> > array of expected results with u16 constants. That will have opposite memory
> > representations on l-e and b-e, so you'll need to byteswap to compare with
> > what you get from function. Alternatively, make it an array of bytes and
> > do
> > sum16 = csum_ipv6_magic(saddr, daddr, len, proto, csum);
> > if (memcmp(sum16, expected_csum_ipv6_magic + i * 2, 2))
> > complain
> >
> > That's it.
>
> Almost. Turns out the csum parameter of csum_ipv6_magic() needs to be in
> network byte order, and the length parameter needs to be in host byte order.
> So instead of
> data.len = data_ptr->len;
> data.csum = (__force __wsum)htonl((__force u32)data_ptr->csum);
> it needs to be something like
> data.len = ntohl(data_ptr->len);
> data.csum = data_ptr->csum;
>
> Also, as you mentioned, either the returned checksum or the expected
> checksum needs to be converted for the comparison because one is in
> network byte order and the other in host byte order.
>
> Address conversions are indeed not needed.
>
> Thanks,
> Guenter
Aww that makes sense thank you. I was reversing everything except len
and the solution was to only reverse len... Thank you for figuring that
out for me.
I will send out another version with your change. Should I add a
signed-off-by with your tag for this patch?
- Charlie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-12 18:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-08 0:22 [PATCH v6 0/2] lib: checksum: Fix issues with checksum tests Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-08 0:22 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] lib: checksum: Fix type casting in checksum kunits Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-08 0:22 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] lib: checksum: Use aligned accesses for ip_fast_csum and csum_ipv6_magic tests Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-08 2:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-12 6:26 ` Al Viro
2024-02-12 17:18 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-12 18:09 ` Charlie Jenkins [this message]
2024-02-12 18:26 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-12 18:12 ` Al Viro
2024-02-12 18:34 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-12 18:41 ` Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-12 18:43 ` Al Viro
2024-02-08 1:45 ` [PATCH v6 0/2] lib: checksum: Fix issues with checksum tests Andrew Morton
2024-02-08 2:09 ` Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-08 2:44 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-08 2:47 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2024-02-08 4:15 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-11 19:18 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-12 5:26 ` Charlie Jenkins
2024-02-12 17:10 ` Guenter Roeck
2024-02-16 9:01 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2024-02-12 12:46 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
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=Zcpe2ZthpFf1BVGg@ghost \
--to=charlie@rivosinc.com \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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