From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
kernel@pengutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/4] net: selftest: improve test string formatting and checksum handling
Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 18:45:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250516184510.2b84fab4@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250515083100.2653102-1-o.rempel@pengutronix.de>
On Thu, 15 May 2025 10:30:56 +0200 Oleksij Rempel wrote:
> - Inconsistent checksum behavior: On DSA setups and similar
> environments, checksum offloading is not always available or
> appropriate. The previous selftests did not distinguish between software
> and hardware checksum modes, leading to unreliable results. This
> patchset introduces explicit csum_mode handling and adds separate tests
> for both software and hardware checksum validation.
What device are you talking about? How is this a problem with
the selftest and not with the stack? If the test is flaky I'd
think real traffic will suffer too. We pass these selftest packets
thru xmit validation AFAICT, so the stack should compute checksum
for the if the device can't.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-17 1:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-15 8:30 [PATCH net-next v4 0/4] net: selftest: improve test string formatting and checksum handling Oleksij Rempel
2025-05-15 8:30 ` [PATCH net-next v4 1/4] net: selftests: drop test index from net_selftest_get_strings() Oleksij Rempel
2025-05-15 8:30 ` [PATCH net-next v4 2/4] net: selftests: prepare for detailed error handling in net_test_get_skb() Oleksij Rempel
2025-05-15 8:30 ` [PATCH net-next v4 3/4] net: selftests: add checksum mode support and SW checksum handling Oleksij Rempel
2025-05-16 12:57 ` Simon Horman
2025-05-17 1:48 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-05-15 8:31 ` [PATCH net-next v4 4/4] net: selftests: add PHY loopback tests with HW checksum offload Oleksij Rempel
2025-05-17 1:45 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2025-06-20 10:53 ` [PATCH net-next v4 0/4] net: selftest: improve test string formatting and checksum handling Oleksij Rempel
2025-06-21 13:46 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-06-23 11:45 ` Oleksij Rempel
2025-06-23 17:19 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-06-24 8:26 ` Oleksij Rempel
2025-06-24 16:09 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-06-25 5:07 ` Oleksij Rempel
2025-06-25 20:21 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-07-11 8:42 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2025-07-11 22:36 ` Jakub Kicinski
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=20250516184510.2b84fab4@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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).