Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v1 2/2] ice: use NETIF_F_HW_CSUM instead of IP/IPV6

[Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>]

On 5/4/2026 9:35 PM, Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
> On Mon, May 04, 2026 at 04:53:12PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
>> On 4/28/2026 12:06 AM, Michal Swiatkowski wrote:
>>> The hardware is capable of calculating checksum for IPV6 packets with
>>> extension header. To not drop such packets switch from IP/IPV6 checksum
>>> to HW_CSUM.
>>>
>>> HW_CSUM is also used in previous generation (i40e).
>>>
>>> Previously HW_CSUM was used to indicate that hardware supports general
>>> checksum. Drop it assuming that if the hardware supports it, it is used.
>>>
>>> Disabling offload for E830 in case of TSO isn't needed anymore as the
>>> check for TSO is done in Tx path just before preparation of the special
>>> GCS descriptor.
>>>
>>> The commit from Fixes didn't introduce a bug, it just shown that the
>>> driver is doing sth wrong with the checksum features.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Jakub Ramaseuski <jramaseu@redhat.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
>>> Fixes: 04c20a9356f2 ("net: skip offload for NETIF_F_IPV6_CSUM if ipv6 header contains extension")
>>> Signed-off-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@linux.intel.com>
>>> ---
>> Am I correct in thinking that this supersedes (really, properly fixes)
>> the patch "ice: enable NETIF_F_HW_CSUM for GSO packets" at
>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/intel-wired-lan/patch/20260310150557.1138437-1-jramaseu@redhat.com/
>> ?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jake
> 
> Yes, exactly. I think I linked it in cover letter, but maybe I should do
> it also here.
> 
> Thanks

I think its fine, I just wanted to make sure I was correct in marking
that patch as rejected in patchwork.

Thanks,
Jake