From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: IPv6-UDP 0x0000 checksum Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:32:21 +0100 Message-ID: <1485444741.14760.12.camel@sipsolutions.net> References: <1485437276.14760.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> <1485438299.5145.117.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> (sfid-20170126_144502_343976_16232A6D) <1485438546.14760.7.camel@sipsolutions.net> <1485441942.5145.131.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> (sfid-20170126_154545_190303_B1FB80BF) <1485442164.14760.11.camel@sipsolutions.net> <1485444276.5145.133.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> (sfid-20170126_162439_678922_DB33D27A) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:50760 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753399AbdAZPc0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:32:26 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1485444276.5145.133.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> (sfid-20170126_162439_678922_DB33D27A) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 07:24 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 15:49 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > Unfortunately, I haven't been able to actually test this yet. I > > also > > didn't find the code that would drop frames with CSUM 0 either, so > > I'm > > thinking - for now - that if all the csum handling is skipped, > > dropping > > 0 csum frames would also be, and then we'd accept a frame we should > > actually have dropped. > > > > I'll go test this I guess :) > > > > Any pointers to where 0 csum frames are dropped? > > Probably in udp6_csum_init() Well, now that I see that, I see that they're actually valid in some circumstances. Oops. :) Will need to revisit, and check how we set no_check6_rx, etc. johannes