netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH v2 5/9] mlx4: Add support for UDP tunnel segmentation with outer checksum offload

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALzJLG9+s+u54ELmUKHMLaa70vWPhXp=-4=Kj9uvooLpXUsvoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 1 May 2016 23:28:59 +0300
From:	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@....mellanox.co.il>
To:	Alexander Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com>
Cc:	Tal Alon <talal@...lanox.com>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	michael.chan@...adcom.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Gal Pressman <galp@...lanox.com>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v2 5/9] mlx4: Add support for UDP tunnel
 segmentation with outer checksum offload

On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 1:43 AM, Alexander Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com> wrote:
> This patch assumes that the mlx4 hardware will ignore existing IPv4/v6
> header fields for length and checksum as well as the length and checksum
> fields for outer UDP headers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_netdev.c |   17 +++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_netdev.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_netdev.c
> index 8bd143dda95d..bce37cbfde24 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_netdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_netdev.c
> @@ -2358,7 +2358,9 @@ out:
>
>         /* set offloads */
>         priv->dev->hw_enc_features |= NETIF_F_IP_CSUM | NETIF_F_RXCSUM |
> -                                     NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL;
> +                                     NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL |
> +                                     NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL_CSUM |
> +                                     NETIF_F_GSO_PARTIAL;
>  }
>
>  static void mlx4_en_del_vxlan_offloads(struct work_struct *work)
> @@ -2368,7 +2370,9 @@ static void mlx4_en_del_vxlan_offloads(struct work_struct *work)
>                                                  vxlan_del_task);
>         /* unset offloads */
>         priv->dev->hw_enc_features &= ~(NETIF_F_IP_CSUM | NETIF_F_RXCSUM |
> -                                     NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL);
> +                                       NETIF_F_TSO | NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL |
> +                                       NETIF_F_GSO_UDP_TUNNEL_CSUM |
> +                                       NETIF_F_GSO_PARTIAL);

I know it is not related to your patch, but is it ok to dynamically
modify priv->dev->hw_enc_features every vxlan add/del_port request ?
especially on a deferred work !
Shouldn't we at least notify the stack ?