Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH API-NEXT v9] IPsec IPv6 implementation
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) replied on github web page: test/validation/api/ipsec/ipsec_test_in.c @@ -947,6 +947,7 @@ static void test_in_ipv4_mcgrew_gcm_4_esp(void) ipsec_sa_destroy(sa); } +#if 0 Comment: @Bill-Fischofer-Linaro It is basically exlained in commit log: `Test 12 is disabled till NoNH packets are properly supported in a defined way`. These are short (empty) packets. In the IETF draft they (incorrectly) bear the NH=ICMP. I plan to reenable this test setting NH=NoNH once RX of such packets is supported. > Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote: > @Bill-Fischofer-Linaro no, I'm going to use it as `ipv4_hdr_len(&ipv4hdr)` >> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: >> Are you really going to use this as `ipv4_hdr_len(pkt + 2)`? The parens in >> the expansion would obscure that. >>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: >>> Same comment here. Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: Causes a checkpatch warning. I assume this is temporary staging, but it would be good to include a comment explaining why this is needed for now. https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/304#discussion_r154325791 updated_at 2017-12-01 11:34:03
Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH API-NEXT v9] IPsec IPv6 implementation
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) replied on github web page: platform/linux-generic/odp_ipsec.c @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static inline int _odp_ipv4_csum_update(odp_packet_t pkt) 2, &chksum); } -#define ipv4_hdr_len(ip) (_ODP_IPV4HDR_IHL(ip->ver_ihl) * 4) +#define ipv4_hdr_len(ip) (_ODP_IPV4HDR_IHL((ip)->ver_ihl) * 4) Comment: @Bill-Fischofer-Linaro no, I'm going to use it as `ipv4_hdr_len(&ipv4hdr)` > Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: > Are you really going to use this as `ipv4_hdr_len(pkt + 2)`? The parens in > the expansion would obscure that. >> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: >> Same comment here. >>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: >>> Causes a checkpatch warning. I assume this is temporary staging, but it >>> would be good to include a comment explaining why this is needed for now. https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/304#discussion_r154259130 updated_at 2017-12-01 03:06:59
Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH API-NEXT v9] IPsec IPv6 implementation
Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) replied on github web page: platform/linux-generic/odp_ipsec.c @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static inline int _odp_ipv4_csum_update(odp_packet_t pkt) 2, &chksum); } -#define ipv4_hdr_len(ip) (_ODP_IPV4HDR_IHL(ip->ver_ihl) * 4) +#define ipv4_hdr_len(ip) (_ODP_IPV4HDR_IHL((ip)->ver_ihl) * 4) Comment: Are you really going to use this as `ipv4_hdr_len(pkt + 2)`? The parens in the expansion would obscure that. > Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: > Same comment here. >> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote: >> Causes a checkpatch warning. I assume this is temporary staging, but it >> would be good to include a comment explaining why this is needed for now. https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/304#discussion_r154251992 updated_at 2017-12-01 02:23:24
Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH API-NEXT v9] IPsec IPv6 implementation
Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) replied on github web page:
test/validation/api/ipsec/ipsec_test_in.c
@@ -1094,8 +1096,10 @@ odp_testinfo_t ipsec_in_suite[] = {
ipsec_check_esp_aes_gcm_256),
ODP_TEST_INFO_CONDITIONAL(test_in_ipv4_mcgrew_gcm_4_esp,
ipsec_check_esp_aes_gcm_128),
+#if 0
Comment:
Same comment here.
> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
> Causes a checkpatch warning. I assume this is temporary staging, but it would
> be good to include a comment explaining why this is needed for now.
https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/304#discussion_r154251223
updated_at 2017-12-01 02:23:24
Re: [lng-odp] [PATCH API-NEXT v9] IPsec IPv6 implementation
Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) replied on github web page: test/validation/api/ipsec/ipsec_test_in.c @@ -947,6 +947,7 @@ static void test_in_ipv4_mcgrew_gcm_4_esp(void) ipsec_sa_destroy(sa); } +#if 0 Comment: Causes a checkpatch warning. I assume this is temporary staging, but it would be good to include a comment explaining why this is needed for now. https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/304#discussion_r154251189 updated_at 2017-12-01 02:23:24
