Re: [PATCH] net: sunhme: Fix packet reception for len < RX_COPY_THRESHOLD

[Sean Anderson]

On 9/19/22 16:39, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 18, 2022 at 05:55:34PM -0400, Sean Anderson wrote:
> > There is a separate receive path for small packets (under 256 bytes).
> > Instead of allocating a new dma-capable skb to be used for the next packet,
> > this path allocates a skb and copies the data into it (reusing the existing
> > sbk for the next packet). There are two bytes of junk data at the beginning
> > of every packet. I believe these are inserted in order to allow aligned
> > DMA and IP headers. We skip over them using skb_reserve. Before copying
> > over the data, we must use a barrier to ensure we see the whole packet. The
> > current code only synchronizes len bytes, starting from the beginning of
> > the packet, including the junk bytes. However, this leaves off the final
> > two bytes in the packet. Synchronize the whole packet.
> >
> > To reproduce this problem, ping a HME with a payload size between 17 and 214
> >
> > 	$ ping -s 17 <hme_address>
> >
> > which will complain rather loudly about the data mismatch. Small packets
> > (below 60 bytes on the wire) do not have this issue. I suspect this is
> > related to the padding added to increase the minimum packet size.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <seanga2@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Hi Sean
>
> > Patch-prefix: net
>
> This should be in the Subject of the email. Various tools look for the
> netdev tree there. Please try to remember that for future patches.

Sorry, it should have been "Series-postfix".

> Please could you add a Fixes: tag indicating when the problem was
> introduced. Its O.K. if that was when the driver was added. It just
> helps getting the patch back ported to older stable kernels.

Well, the driver was added before git was started...

I suppose I could blame 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2"), but maybe I
should just CC the stable list?

> I think patchwork allows you to just reply to your post, and it will
> automagically append the Fixes: tag when the Maintainer actually
> applies the patch.
>
> Reviewed-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@xxxxxxx>
>
>      Andrew

--Sean