netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net/mlx5: Implement swp_l4_csum

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20251022164112.40b5f5ae@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2025 16:41:12 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Zahka <daniel.zahka@...il.com>
Cc: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Saeed
 Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Simon
 Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Leon
 Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>, Andrew Lunn
 <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, Vlad Dumitrescu <vdumitrescu@...dia.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/mlx5: Implement swp_l4_csum_mode via
 devlink params

On Wed, 22 Oct 2025 12:09:31 -0700 Daniel Zahka wrote:
> swp_l4_csum_mode controls how L4 transmit checksums are computed when
> using Software Parser (SWP) hints for header locations.
> 
> Supported values:
>   1. device_default: use device default setting.
>   2. full_csum: calculate L4 checksum with the psuedo-header.
>   3. l4_only: calculate L4 checksum without the psuedo-header. Only
>      available when swp_l4_csum_mode_l4_only is set in
>      mlx5_ifc_nv_sw_offload_cap_bits.

make htmldoc seems to be upset about the formatting of the
Documentation. 

Documentation/networking/devlink/mlx5.rst:78: ERROR: Error parsing content block for the "list-table" directive: exactly one bullet list expected.

Not clear to me why the new entry is bad and existing one with double
bullets are okay, but we can't have errors..
-- 
pw-bot: cr