[PATCH] net/iavf: fix IAVF_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK definition

[Radu Nicolau]

On 25-Oct-23 12:30 AM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nicolau, Radu <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 10:49 PM
>> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang at intel.com>; Marchand, David
>> <david.marchand at redhat.com>
>> Cc: Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu at intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing at intel.com>;
>> dev at dpdk.org; stable at dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/iavf: fix IAVF_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK definition
>>
>>
>> On 24-Oct-23 12:24 PM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 6:23 PM
>>>> To: Marchand, David <david.marchand at redhat.com>
>>>> Cc: Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu at intel.com>; Xing, Beilei
>>>> <beilei.xing at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org; stable at dpdk.org
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/iavf: fix IAVF_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK definition
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 24-Oct-23 10:49 AM, David Marchand wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 11:13 AM Radu Nicolau
>>>>> <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> IAVF_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK definition contained
>>>> RTE_ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY
>>>>>> instead of RTE_MBUF_F_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: 6bc987ecb860 ("net/iavf: support IPsec inline crypto")
>>>>>> Cc: stable at dpdk.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Radu Nicolau <radu.nicolau at intel.com>
>>>>> Something is not clear to me.
>>>>> How was the IPsec inline crypto feature supposed to work with this
>>>>> driver so far?
>>>>>
>>>>> Any packet with the RTE_MBUF_F_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD flag should have
>> been
>>>>> refused in iavf_prep_pkts.
>>>>>
>>>> It worked because the IPsec sample app doesn't call
>>>> rte_eth_tx_prepare, and from what I can see no other sample app does.
>>> To keep consistent, its better to refine the
>> IAVF_TX_OFFLOAD_NOTSUP_MASK definition.
>>
>> You mean like this?
>>
>>
>> #define IAVF_TX_OFFLOAD_NOTSUP_MASK ( \
>>           RTE_MBUF_F_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK ^ (  \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_OUTER_IPV6 |         \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_OUTER_IPV4 |         \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_IPV6 |             \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_IPV4 |             \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_VLAN |         \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_IP_CKSUM |         \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_L4_MASK |         \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_TCP_SEG |         \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_UDP_SEG |      \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_TUNNEL_MASK |    \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_OUTER_IP_CKSUM |  \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_OUTER_UDP_CKSUM | \
>>               RTE_MBUF_F_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD))
> Sorry, I miss understanding this code change, actually you didn't remove a flag, but just replace it,  NOTSUP_MASK no need to be changed
>
> Then I don't understand why "Any packet with the RTE_MBUF_F_TX_SEC_OFFLOAD flag should have refused in iavf_prep_pkts"
> But I assume tx_pkt_prepare should reject only invalid packets while still functioning correctly with inline IPsec.

rte_eth_tx_prepare would have rejected the packets before this fix, but 
no app calls rte_eth_tx_prepare. The only app that calls it is testpmd.