[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220124102051.7c40e015@kicinski-fedora-PC1C0HJN.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2022 10:20:51 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Luiz Angelo Daros de Luca <luizluca@...il.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Frank Wunderlich <frank-w@...lic-files.de>,
Alvin Šipraga <ALSI@...g-olufsen.dk>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"vivien.didelot@...il.com" <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
"arinc.unal@...nc9.com" <arinc.unal@...nc9.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 11/11] net: dsa: realtek: rtl8365mb:
multiple cpu ports, non cpu extint
On Mon, 24 Jan 2022 09:35:56 -0800 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Sorry I used "geometry" loosely.
>
> What I meant is simply that if the driver uses NETIF_F_IP*_CSUM
> it should parse the packet before it hands it off to the HW.
>
> There is infinity of protocols users can come up with, while the device
> parser is very much finite, so it's only practical to check compliance
> with the HW parser in the driver. The reverse approach of adding
> per-protocol caps is a dead end IMO. And we should not bloat the stack
> when NETIF_F_HW_CSUM exists and the memo that parsing packets on Tx is
> bad b/c of protocol ossification went out a decade ago.
> It's not about DSA. The driver should not check
>
> if (dsa())
> blah;
>
> it should check
>
> if (!(eth [-> vlan] -> ip -> tcp/udp))
> csum_help();
Admittedly on a quick look thru the drivers which already do this
I only see L3, L4 and GRE/UDP encap checks. Nothing validates L2.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists