From: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
To: Justin Lai <justinlai0215@realtek.com>
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"andrew+netdev@lunn.ch" <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
"richardcochran@gmail.com" <richardcochran@gmail.com>,
"aleksander.lobakin@intel.com" <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>,
Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>,
Larry Chiu <larry.chiu@realtek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] rtase: Workaround for IP fragmented UDP packet hardware bug
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 13:43:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260609134334.3225b076@pumpkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1340406ab190498ab857ad9017529722@realtek.com>
On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 08:20:10 +0000
Justin Lai <justinlai0215@realtek.com> wrote:
> Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> 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
> > ---
> > rtase: Workaround for IP fragmented UDP packet hardware bug
> >
> > The hardware parser incorrectly interprets 319/320 in a short IP fragmented
> > UDP packet payload as standard PTP destination ports and treats the fragment
> > as a PTP packet for further parsing. Pad these packets so the transport data
> > reaches RTASE_MIN_PAD_LEN before transmitting to avoid triggering the
> > hardware issue.
> >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/rtase/rtase_main.c
> > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/rtase/rtase_main.c
> > > index ef13109c49cff..b686b84e15fe2 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/rtase/rtase_main.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/rtase/rtase_main.c
> >
> > [ ... ]
> >
> > > @@ -1247,6 +1248,52 @@ static u32 rtase_tx_csum(struct sk_buff *skb,
> > const struct net_device *dev)
> > > return csum_cmd;
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static bool rtase_skb_is_udp(struct sk_buff *skb) {
> > > + int no = skb_network_offset(skb);
> > > + struct ipv6hdr *i6h, _i6h;
> > > + struct iphdr *ih, _ih;
> > > +
> > > + switch (vlan_get_protocol(skb)) {
> > > + case htons(ETH_P_IP):
> > > + ih = skb_header_pointer(skb, no, sizeof(_ih), &_ih);
> > > + return ih && ih->protocol == IPPROTO_UDP;
> > > + case htons(ETH_P_IPV6):
> > > + i6h = skb_header_pointer(skb, no, sizeof(_i6h), &_i6h);
> > > + return i6h && i6h->nexthdr == IPPROTO_UDP;
> >
> > [Severity: High]
> > Does this check fail to traverse IPv6 extension headers?
> >
> > If an IPv6 packet contains extension headers, such as an IPv6 fragment
> > (IPPROTO_FRAGMENT), the nexthdr field will contain the extension header's
> > protocol number instead of UDP.
> >
> > Doesn't this bypass the workaround for the exact fragmented packets it is
> > intended to fix?
> >
> Thanks for the review.
>
> Unlike IPv4, IPv6 does not require extension header parsing for
> this workaround. The hardware only treats IPv6 packets without
> extension headers as PTP packets for further parsing.
>
> Therefore, IPv6 packets carrying extension headers, including
> fragments, do not enter this parsing path and are not affected
> by the hardware issue addressed by this workaround.
>
> Skipping such packets is intentional.
I thought you said that the problem only arose with packets that are
fragmented by IPv[46], in particular short final fragments.
If your hardware checks for extension headers then doesn't that mean
that you never have a problem with IPv6 packets.
-- David
...
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-09 12:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-04 10:13 [PATCH net v2] rtase: Workaround for IP fragmented UDP packet hardware bug Justin Lai
2026-06-08 19:06 ` Simon Horman
2026-06-09 8:20 ` Justin Lai
2026-06-09 12:43 ` David Laight [this message]
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=20260609134334.3225b076@pumpkin \
--to=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=aleksander.lobakin@intel.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=justinlai0215@realtek.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=larry.chiu@realtek.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=pkshih@realtek.com \
--cc=richardcochran@gmail.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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