On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 06:45 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, 2017-01-26 at 14:49 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > Oops, sorry - receive. We can only indicate "CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY", > > nothing more advanced right now, but right now we'd indicate that > > if > > the packet had 0x0000 in the checksum field, but should've had > > 0xffff. > > > > On TX I believe we actually do in HW exactly what your patch just > > did. > > Can you describe the visible effects of this problem ? > > Is that because of a conversion we might do later to > CHECKSUM_COMPLETE ? Unfortunately, I haven't been able to actually test this yet. I also didn't find the code that would drop frames with CSUM 0 either, so I'm thinking - for now - that if all the csum handling is skipped, dropping 0 csum frames would also be, and then we'd accept a frame we should actually have dropped. I'll go test this I guess :) Any pointers to where 0 csum frames are dropped? johannes
