Re: Problem with checksum offloading on RPi3 (PF + Jails involved)

"Kristof Provost" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.os.freebsd.devel.arm,gmane.os.freebsd.devel.hackers
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 19 Nov 2020, at 3:22, YongHyeon PYUN wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 10:47:08AM +0100, Carsten Bäcker wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Sorry, that's my fault - i overlooked your request for a test with pf
>> enabled.
>> The example-ruleset is attached again. I added a line to allow the
>> incoming ping to 5555.
>>
>> I don't see a difference until i enable the redirection to the jail
>> which makes the packet with extended data-length fail.
>> Once i disable RXCSUM it works.
>>
>
> Thanks for testing.  Unfortunately I couldn't find a driver issue
> on patched smsc(4).  Quick looking pf(4) makes me wonder how it
> verifies UDP datagrams.
>
> Kristof, does pf(4) take advantage of H/W checksummed result for
> UDP datagrams?
Yes. Pf updates checksums if they’re present, rather than fully 
recalculating them.

> It seems pf_check_proto_cksum() always pass
> IPPROTO_TCP such that UDP pseudo checksum is not computed in the
> function.
Note that pf_check_proto_cksum() is only ever called from pf_return(), 
and then only if pf->proto == IPPROTO_TCP.
Checksum updates are mostly done through pf_proto_cksum_fixup(), in 
different parts of the code.

Best egards,
Kristof
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arm
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.