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]
Date:   Mon, 28 Nov 2022 11:14:52 -0500
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        edumazet@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests/net: add csum offload test

On Mon, Nov 28, 2022 at 11:08 AM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2022-11-28 at 09:02 -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > From: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
> >
> > Test NIC hardware checksum offload:
> >
> > - Rx + Tx
> > - IPv4 + IPv6
> > - TCP + UDP
> >
> > Optional features:
> >
> > - zero checksum 0xFFFF
> > - checksum disable 0x0000
> > - transport encap headers
> > - randomization
> >
> > See file header for detailed comments.
> >
> > Expected results differ depending on NIC features:
> >
> > - CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY vs CHECKSUM_COMPLETE
> > - NETIF_F_HW_CSUM (csum_start/csum_off) vs NETIF_F_IP(V6)_CSUM
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
>
> I'm wondering if we could hook this into the self-tests list with a
> suitable wrapper script, e.g. searching for a NIC exposing the loopback
> feature, quering the NETIF_F_HW_CSUM/NETIF_F_IP(V6)_CSUM bit via
> ethtool and guessing CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY vs CHECKSUM_COMPLETE via the
> received packet.
>
> If the host lacks a suitable device, the test is skipped. WDYT?

We could. Optionally with ipvlan and two netns to really emulate a two
host setup.

I'm hesitant to include this into kselftests without warning though.
Have too often had to debug tests that crashed and left a machine
unreachable, because in loopback mode.

Either way, something to do as a separate follow-up patch?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists