On 12/06/2024 15:49, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 07:58:50 -0700 Vadim Fedorenko wrote:@@ -1060,9 +1062,19 @@ int bpf_prog_test_run_skb(struct bpf_prog *prog, const union bpf_attr *kattr, __skb_push(skb, hh_len); if (is_direct_pkt_access) bpf_compute_data_pointers(skb); + ret = convert___skb_to_skb(skb, ctx); if (ret) goto out; + + if (kattr->test.flags & BPF_F_TEST_SKB_CHECKSUM_COMPLETE) { + const int off = skb_network_offset(skb); + int len = skb->len - off; + + skb->csum = skb_checksum(skb, off, len, 0); + skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_COMPLETE; + }Looks good, overall, although I'd be tempted to place this before the L2 is pushed, a few lines up, so that we don't need to worry about network offset. Then again, with you approach there is a nice symmetry between the pre- and post- if blocks so either way is fine: Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Daniel! Could you please take a look and merge the series? Thanks, Vadim
