Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) replied on github web page:
platform/linux-generic/odp_packet.c
line 5
@@ -1286,7 +1286,7 @@ int odp_packet_l2_offset_set(odp_packet_t pkt, uint32_t
offset)
{
odp_packet_hdr_t *pkt_hdr = packet_hdr(pkt);
- if (offset >= pkt_hdr->frame_len)
+ if (offset > pkt_hdr->frame_len)
Comment:
Hmm. We've spent several minutes on this, but nobody reminded of API
convention. Should we change the spec here? @psavol what is your opinion?
> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
> We require that an application sets `l3_offset` for all packet it pushes to
> IPsec. For TFC dummy packets it resulted in `l3_offset` being set but
> ignored. Thus I proposed this change. Other solution might be to stop
> requiring `l3_offset` for TFC dummy packets.
>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>> Should `0xa5` be a `#define` rather than a "magic number"?
>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>> Nit: could use `odp_unlikely()` here.
>>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>>> This change requires an API change as the spec says relevant offsets must
>>>> be in the range `0..odp_packet_len(pkt) - 1` . Same comment for the L3
>>>> and L4 changes in this patch.
>>>>
>>>> In theory the validation tests should test these bounds, but as with most
>>>> parts of the API violations simply result in undefined behavior, so this
>>>> is an "honor system". Still, we can't violate the spec here without
>>>> changing the spec.
>>>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>>>> Unless it has been parsed, `odp_packet_l3_offset()` is initialized to
>>>>> `ODP_PACKET_OFFSET_INVALID`, so this seems an undue burden. The original
>>>>> wording seems cleaner from an application perspective.
https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/494#discussion_r169886720
updated_at 2018-02-22 08:46:35
