From owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Thu Nov 19 02:22:12 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arm@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BFD447BC7C; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 02:22:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyunyh@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pg1-x529.google.com (mail-pg1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::529]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1O1" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Cc3NN1v8Xz3JqC; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 02:22:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyunyh@gmail.com) Received: by mail-pg1-x529.google.com with SMTP id 62so2800451pgg.12; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:22:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=NK7k7lpxMllAWLL0yEzY4uJiczYqC+bj/iG9k0Sgn/Q=; b=r61MU/uGKPtpb0ROTVMSAdiCcukHJ4ZgDftMW9T2hD5/dF9Zd8CZVZR/Z4YZIHNuLI cK5R/r2jx5uKLlYv8TRE2YMDgMJlaGClDSi5AhCiM51dtKPTPppnUj/1iVPr4zk70ad2 LNvAv1W0B3e3GXCxkjMZX+1F5TKteP7IhmquMdTi7G4vHWSNngN8r/XrVmYTBNNt79n9 oDo2TgohEJp7CG8jrSgdp5SbroG+U195wAzi6QK1eZ6d6USkxRmI8a/bR8wpRiOPhCZR +sSIzpMBt+0974Uu0/b6ezooWJzlVvyYsiYk7iv5Ax+21bA8xbyVqpLR71X3GMm/TZ2e NDzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=NK7k7lpxMllAWLL0yEzY4uJiczYqC+bj/iG9k0Sgn/Q=; b=LD9ZLywlOFWSv+FG6sPiN6+gbtAdZUlNdALsIhmRvtFc3ycezgEytEhCG/KTs2BM0x JqBpN2qiZkT9Jz8i1NuwpkHi1OgA81Wht3J09nNGOZDt6qSjM8C/GVo5kyiOOAE/mh+G Kp1525TgU+9OX2P3tBIXwl3yGulQr0NB17/tHw37qcCsmd5gUS/C5zO3BykX/8Ajg22J Vri4xAMsVyAeeuvmFySIHt0HX9/1pV3xWrU3lTNLqx7nfNPrYrLb/AuDmJ0YH1YSDyRz wKYruAgX5GOD2Ad+nhu4/Jj9+1+AWwncIDxBlEgoclDmUNqXnumpJbNbXSMM3s3wpC4Z fb+w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5304lGuB7040AMwE1/fLfI88nAP6k8OXNe3D7ANw8AOwx2uqlaaS IoBBeaCAokHwkTOfBBN08CM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZc+zrM4UJbWcRsLaTZLFRm3sVCa6hIKTtmP1/ML4aZBfWzjRAq4ZpduLVMjbrOiOgCP5o1g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:bc83:: with SMTP id x3mr1973141pjr.90.1605752530775; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:22:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([210.108.244.139]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w66sm30840522pff.171.2020.11.18.18.22.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 18:22:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:22:08 +0900 From: YongHyeon PYUN To: Carsten =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=E4cker?= Cc: Hans Petter Selasky , Kristof Provost , freebsd-arm@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Problem with checksum offloading on RPi3 (PF + Jails involved) Message-ID: <20201119022208.GB1974@michelle> References: <20201103045215.GA2524@michelle> <46d08198-530c-cb4b-efa8-4edaf89471c1@selasky.org> <4dfaa9a3-c085-8466-a6e4-19f988b5ed3d@selasky.org> <20201116011910.GB1941@michelle> <1245cbe5-9d2f-4808-f989-569ae7d57a8a@gmx.de> <20201117030406.GA45158@michelle> <20201118044857.GA1974@michelle> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4Cc3NN1v8Xz3JqC X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: "Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 02:22:12 -0000 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? It seems pf_check_proto_cksum() always pass IPPROTO_TCP such that UDP pseudo checksum is not computed in the function. I'm under the impression that incremental checksum update for UDP datagrams with only CSUM_DATA_VALID bit wouldn't work.