Re: [PATCH v6 RESEND net-next 2/5] net: enetc: add Tx checksum offload for i.MX95 ENETC

[Simon Horman]

On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 12:38:49PM +0000, Wei Fang wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: 2024年12月6日 20:32
> > To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@xxxxxxx>; Vladimir Oltean
> > <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx>; Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@xxxxxxx>;
> > andrew+netdev@xxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; Frank Li <frank.li@xxxxxxx>;
> > netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 RESEND net-next 2/5] net: enetc: add Tx checksum
> > offload for i.MX95 ENETC
> > 
> > On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 10:46:49AM +0000, Wei Fang wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: 2024年12月6日 17:37
> > > > To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@xxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@xxxxxxx>; Vladimir Oltean
> > > > <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx>; Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@xxxxxxx>;
> > > > andrew+netdev@xxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > kuba@xxxxxxxxxx; pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; Frank Li <frank.li@xxxxxxx>;
> > > > netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> > > > imx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 RESEND net-next 2/5] net: enetc: add Tx
> > > > checksum offload for i.MX95 ENETC
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Dec 04, 2024 at 01:29:29PM +0800, Wei Fang wrote:
> > > > > In addition to supporting Rx checksum offload, i.MX95 ENETC also
> > > > > supports Tx checksum offload. The transmit checksum offload is
> > > > > implemented through the Tx BD. To support Tx checksum offload,
> > > > > software needs to fill some auxiliary information in Tx BD, such
> > > > > as IP version, IP header offset and size, whether L4 is UDP or TCP, etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > Same as Rx checksum offload, Tx checksum offload capability isn't
> > > > > defined in register, so tx_csum bit is added to struct
> > > > > enetc_drvdata to indicate whether the device supports Tx checksum
> > offload.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Wei Fang <wei.fang@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Frank Li <Frank.Li@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@xxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_hw.h
> > > > b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_hw.h
> > > > > index 4b8fd1879005..590b1412fadf 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_hw.h
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/enetc/enetc_hw.h
> > > > > @@ -558,7 +558,12 @@ union enetc_tx_bd {
> > > > >  		__le16 frm_len;
> > > > >  		union {
> > > > >  			struct {
> > > > > -				u8 reserved[3];
> > > > > +				u8 l3_start:7;
> > > > > +				u8 ipcs:1;
> > > > > +				u8 l3_hdr_size:7;
> > > > > +				u8 l3t:1;
> > > > > +				u8 resv:5;
> > > > > +				u8 l4t:3;
> > > > >  				u8 flags;
> > > > >  			}; /* default layout */
> > > >
> > > > Hi Wei,
> > > >
> > > > Given that little-endian types are used elsewhere in this structure
> > > > I am guessing that the layout above works for little-endian hosts
> > > > but will not work on big-endian hosts.
> > > >
> > > > If so, I would suggest an alternate approach of using a single
> > > > 32-bit word and accessing it using a combination of FIELD_PREP() and
> > > > FIELD_GET() using masks created using GENMASK() and BIT().
> > >
> > > Good suggestion, I will refine it, thanks.
> > 
> > Thanks. I forgot to mention that you will likely also need to add
> > cpu_to_le32 and le32_to_cpu to the mix.
> > 
> 
> I think I will use u8 instead of 32-bit, because I don't want to affect
> the existing 'u8 flag'. And u8 is good enough.

Sure, I agree that looks like it should work.