From: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
[ Upstream commit f231dc9dbd789b0f98a15941e3cebedb4ad72ad5 ]
Combined L3+L4 csum offload is only required for some L3 HW. So for
L2 devices, don't offload the IP header csum calculation.
Signed-off-by: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
Reference-ID: JUP 394553
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
---
drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h | 5 -----
drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c | 5 +++++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h
index b2657582cfcfd..41a2f901ccee5 100644
--- a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h
+++ b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h
@@ -902,11 +902,6 @@ static inline void qeth_tx_csum(struct sk_buff *skb, u8 *flags, int ipv)
if ((ipv == 4 && ip_hdr(skb)->protocol == IPPROTO_UDP) ||
(ipv == 6 && ipv6_hdr(skb)->nexthdr == IPPROTO_UDP))
*flags |= QETH_HDR_EXT_UDP;
- if (ipv == 4) {
- /* some HW requires combined L3+L4 csum offload: */
- *flags |= QETH_HDR_EXT_CSUM_HDR_REQ;
- ip_hdr(skb)->check = 0;
- }
}
static inline void qeth_put_buffer_pool_entry(struct qeth_card *card,
diff --git a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c
index 9c5e801b3f6cb..c60660cb5a031 100644
--- a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c
+++ b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c
@@ -2054,6 +2054,11 @@ static void qeth_l3_fill_header(struct qeth_card *card, struct qeth_hdr *hdr,
if (!skb_is_gso(skb) && skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_PARTIAL) {
qeth_tx_csum(skb, &hdr->hdr.l3.ext_flags, ipv);
+ /* some HW requires combined L3+L4 csum offload: */
+ if (ipv == 4) {
+ hdr->hdr.l3.ext_flags |= QETH_HDR_EXT_CSUM_HDR_REQ;
+ ip_hdr(skb)->check = 0;
+ }
if (card->options.performance_stats)
card->perf_stats.tx_csum++;
}
--
2.20.1
On 08.11.19 12:37, Sasha Levin wrote:
> From: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
>
> [ Upstream commit f231dc9dbd789b0f98a15941e3cebedb4ad72ad5 ]
>
> Combined L3+L4 csum offload is only required for some L3 HW. So for
> L2 devices, don't offload the IP header csum calculation.
>
NACK, this has no relevance for stable.
> Signed-off-by: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
> Reference-ID: JUP 394553
> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h | 5 -----
> drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c | 5 +++++
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h
> index b2657582cfcfd..41a2f901ccee5 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h
> +++ b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_core.h
> @@ -902,11 +902,6 @@ static inline void qeth_tx_csum(struct sk_buff *skb, u8 *flags, int ipv)
> if ((ipv == 4 && ip_hdr(skb)->protocol == IPPROTO_UDP) ||
> (ipv == 6 && ipv6_hdr(skb)->nexthdr == IPPROTO_UDP))
> *flags |= QETH_HDR_EXT_UDP;
> - if (ipv == 4) {
> - /* some HW requires combined L3+L4 csum offload: */
> - *flags |= QETH_HDR_EXT_CSUM_HDR_REQ;
> - ip_hdr(skb)->check = 0;
> - }
> }
>
> static inline void qeth_put_buffer_pool_entry(struct qeth_card *card,
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c
> index 9c5e801b3f6cb..c60660cb5a031 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/net/qeth_l3_main.c
> @@ -2054,6 +2054,11 @@ static void qeth_l3_fill_header(struct qeth_card *card, struct qeth_hdr *hdr,
>
> if (!skb_is_gso(skb) && skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_PARTIAL) {
> qeth_tx_csum(skb, &hdr->hdr.l3.ext_flags, ipv);
> + /* some HW requires combined L3+L4 csum offload: */
> + if (ipv == 4) {
> + hdr->hdr.l3.ext_flags |= QETH_HDR_EXT_CSUM_HDR_REQ;
> + ip_hdr(skb)->check = 0;
> + }
> if (card->options.performance_stats)
> card->perf_stats.tx_csum++;
> }
>
On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:50:24PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
>On 08.11.19 12:37, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> From: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit f231dc9dbd789b0f98a15941e3cebedb4ad72ad5 ]
>>
>> Combined L3+L4 csum offload is only required for some L3 HW. So for
>> L2 devices, don't offload the IP header csum calculation.
>>
>
>NACK, this has no relevance for stable.
Sure, I'll drop it.
Do you have an idea why the centos and ubuntu folks might have
backported this commit into their kernels?
--
Thanks,
Sasha
On 08.11.19 13:00, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:50:24PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
>> On 08.11.19 12:37, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>> From: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> [ Upstream commit f231dc9dbd789b0f98a15941e3cebedb4ad72ad5 ]
>>>
>>> Combined L3+L4 csum offload is only required for some L3 HW. So for
>>> L2 devices, don't offload the IP header csum calculation.
>>>
>>
>> NACK, this has no relevance for stable.
>
> Sure, I'll drop it.
>
> Do you have an idea why the centos and ubuntu folks might have
> backported this commit into their kernels?
>
No clue, I trust they have their own reasons.
On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:16:26PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
> On 08.11.19 13:00, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:50:24PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
> >> On 08.11.19 12:37, Sasha Levin wrote:
> >>> From: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
> >>>
> >>> [ Upstream commit f231dc9dbd789b0f98a15941e3cebedb4ad72ad5 ]
> >>>
> >>> Combined L3+L4 csum offload is only required for some L3 HW. So for
> >>> L2 devices, don't offload the IP header csum calculation.
> >>>
> >>
> >> NACK, this has no relevance for stable.
> >
> > Sure, I'll drop it.
> >
> > Do you have an idea why the centos and ubuntu folks might have
> > backported this commit into their kernels?
> >
>
> No clue, I trust they have their own reasons.
>
I cant see centos backporting anything unless they were asked to do so.
And this really looks like a "bugfix" to me, why isn't this relevant for
any older kernel versions?
thanks,
greg k-h
From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:34:16 +0100
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:16:26PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
>> On 08.11.19 13:00, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> > On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:50:24PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
>> >> On 08.11.19 12:37, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> >>> From: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
>> >>>
>> >>> [ Upstream commit f231dc9dbd789b0f98a15941e3cebedb4ad72ad5 ]
>> >>>
>> >>> Combined L3+L4 csum offload is only required for some L3 HW. So for
>> >>> L2 devices, don't offload the IP header csum calculation.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> NACK, this has no relevance for stable.
>> >
>> > Sure, I'll drop it.
>> >
>> > Do you have an idea why the centos and ubuntu folks might have
>> > backported this commit into their kernels?
>> >
>>
>> No clue, I trust they have their own reasons.
>>
>
> I cant see centos backporting anything unless they were asked to do so.
> And this really looks like a "bugfix" to me, why isn't this relevant for
> any older kernel versions?
Yeah seriously, this looks entirely legit.
On 08.11.19 20:35, David Miller wrote:
> From: Greg KH <[email protected]>
> Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:34:16 +0100
>
>> On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 01:16:26PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
>>> On 08.11.19 13:00, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 12:50:24PM +0100, Julian Wiedmann wrote:
>>>>> On 08.11.19 12:37, Sasha Levin wrote:
>>>>>> From: Julian Wiedmann <[email protected]>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [ Upstream commit f231dc9dbd789b0f98a15941e3cebedb4ad72ad5 ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Combined L3+L4 csum offload is only required for some L3 HW. So for
>>>>>> L2 devices, don't offload the IP header csum calculation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> NACK, this has no relevance for stable.
>>>>
>>>> Sure, I'll drop it.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have an idea why the centos and ubuntu folks might have
>>>> backported this commit into their kernels?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No clue, I trust they have their own reasons.
>>>
>>
>> I cant see centos backporting anything unless they were asked to do so.
>> And this really looks like a "bugfix" to me, why isn't this relevant for
>> any older kernel versions?
>
> Yeah seriously, this looks entirely legit.
>
I can assure you this doesn't fix any actual bug, and there's zero user
impact from _not_ having this patch.