From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com
Cc: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
jramaseu@redhat.com, anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com,
przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com, aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-net v1 2/2] ice: use NETIF_F_HW_CSUM instead of IP/IPV6
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2026 17:21:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260430162149.GC900403@horms.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260430152948.1683359-2-horms@kernel.org>
On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 04:29:49PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> From: 'Simon Horman' <horms@kernel.org>
>
> This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
> email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
> Full review at: https://sashiko.dev
Sorry, the email I am responding to was supposed to come with
some commentary - it seems my method for adding it is broken :(
So I'm adding it below (as best as I can remember what it was).
> ---
> ice: use NETIF_F_HW_CSUM instead of IP/IPV6
>
> This commit replaces the IP and IPV6 checksum offload flags with HW_CSUM
> in the ice driver to allow hardware checksumming for IPv6 packets with
> extension headers. It also removes the mutual exclusivity check between
> TSO and GCS.
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
> > index 5f92377d4dfc..33f252a6a22f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ice/ice_main.c
> > @@ -3491,9 +3491,8 @@ void ice_set_netdev_features(struct net_device *netdev)
> > NETIF_F_RXHASH;
> >
> > csumo_features = NETIF_F_RXCSUM |
> > - NETIF_F_IP_CSUM |
> > NETIF_F_SCTP_CRC |
> > - NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM;
> > + NETIF_F_HW_CSUM;
>
> By advertising NETIF_F_HW_CSUM, the network stack assumes the driver can handle
> checksums for any protocol and passes non-IP packets (e.g., from AF_PACKET
> injected frames) to the driver with CHECKSUM_PARTIAL.
>
> Since ice_tx_csum() strictly parses the L3 header and expects IPv4 or IPv6,
> returning -1 for other protocols, will this regression cause non-IP packets to
> be silently dropped instead of falling back to software checksums in the kernel?
The problem above seems to be a legitimate concern, if a corner case.
It seems to also exist in i40e.
> Additionally, skb_csum_hwoffload_help() relies on NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM to
> safely fall back to software checksums when IPv6 extension headers are
> present.
>
> Does using NETIF_F_HW_CSUM bypass this safeguard, potentially causing
> legacy hardware (like E810) or E830 without GCS descriptors to compute
> incorrect pseudo-headers and silently corrupt IPv6 packets with extension
> headers?
The issue above seems to be a false positive as the ice driver
doesn't rely on the behaviour described. Rather ice_tx_csum()
uses ipv6_skip_exthdr() to correctly handle extension headers.
>
> Finally, for protocols other than TCP, UDP, or SCTP, the driver falls back to
> calling skb_checksum_help(skb) in the default case of ice_tx_csum().
>
> However, the driver appears to ignore the return value of skb_checksum_help().
>
> If skb_checksum_help() fails (e.g., due to -ENOMEM during pskb_expand_head()),
> could this result in the packet being transmitted with an uncomputed checksum?
The problem above seems real to me, but it also seems to be pre-existing.
So I don't think it should delay progress of this patch.
If it is a problem, it also seems to be present in i40e.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-30 16:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-28 7:06 [PATCH iwl-net v1 0/2] Rework ice Tx checksum Michal Swiatkowski
2026-04-28 7:06 ` [PATCH iwl-net v1 1/2] ice: always do GCS if hardware supports it Michal Swiatkowski
2026-04-28 7:06 ` [PATCH iwl-net v1 2/2] ice: use NETIF_F_HW_CSUM instead of IP/IPV6 Michal Swiatkowski
2026-04-28 8:34 ` Loktionov, Aleksandr
2026-04-30 15:29 ` Simon Horman
2026-04-30 16:21 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2026-05-04 8:09 ` Michal Swiatkowski
2026-05-04 23:53 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jacob Keller
2026-05-05 4:35 ` Michal Swiatkowski
2026-05-05 5:16 ` Jacob Keller
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=20260430162149.GC900403@horms.kernel.org \
--to=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=aleksandr.loktionov@intel.com \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=jramaseu@redhat.com \
--cc=michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.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