netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] net: macb: Disable TX checksum offloading on all Zynq

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: <CAFcVEC+pc5T900tUezgfNwKx6nzFg8+gF3oPbz7RV7aHcKDy9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 5 Jun 2018 10:21:38 +0530
From:   Harini Katakam <harinik@...inx.com>
To:     Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>
Cc:     Jennifer Dahm <jennifer.dahm@...com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Nathan Sullivan <nathan.sullivan@...com>,
        Rafal Ozieblo <rafalo@...ence.com>,
        Claudiu Beznea <Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com>,
        Harini Katakam <harini.katakam@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] net: macb: Disable TX checksum offloading on all Zynq

Hi Jeniffer,

On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 8:35 PM, Nicolas Ferre
<nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com> wrote:
> Jennifer,
>
> On 25/05/2018 at 23:44, Jennifer Dahm wrote:
>>
>> During testing, I discovered that the Zynq GEM hardware overwrites all
>> outgoing UDP packet checksums, which is illegal in packet forwarding
>> cases. This happens both with and without the checksum-zeroing
>> behavior  introduced  in  007e4ba3ee137f4700f39aa6dbaf01a71047c5f6
>> ("net: macb: initialize checksum when using checksum offloading"). The
>> only solution to both the small packet bug and the packet forwarding
>> bug that I can find is to disable TX checksum offloading entirely.
>
>

Thanks for the extensive testing.
I'll try to reproduce and see if it is something to be fixed in the driver.

> Are the bugs listed above present in all revisions of the GEM IP, only for
> some revisions?
> Is there an errata that describe this issue for the Zynq GEM?

@Nicolas, AFAIK, there is no errata for this in either Cadence or
Zynq documentation.

Regards,
Harini