From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Cc: "James E . J . Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
Subject: [PATCH] parisc: Fix ip_fast_csum
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2024 09:55:26 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240210175526.3710522-1-linux@roeck-us.net> (raw)
IP checksum unit tests report the following error when run on hppa/hppa64.
# test_ip_fast_csum: ASSERTION FAILED at lib/checksum_kunit.c:463
Expected ( u64)csum_result == ( u64)expected, but
( u64)csum_result == 33754 (0x83da)
( u64)expected == 10946 (0x2ac2)
not ok 4 test_ip_fast_csum
0x83da is the expected result if the IP header length is 20 bytes. 0x2ac2
is the expected result if the IP header length is 24 bytes. The test fails
with an IP header length of 24 bytes. It appears that ip_fast_csum()
always returns the checksum for a 20-byte header, no matter how long
the header actually is.
Code analysis shows a suspicious assembler sequence in ip_fast_csum().
" addc %0, %3, %0\n"
"1: ldws,ma 4(%1), %3\n"
" addib,< 0, %2, 1b\n" <---
While my understanding of HPPA assembler is limited, it does not seem
to make much sense to subtract 0 from a register and to expect the result
to ever be negative. Subtracting 1 from the length parameter makes more
sense. On top of that, the operation should be repeated if and only if
the result is still > 0, so change the suspicious instruction to
" addib,> -1, %2, 1b\n"
The IP checksum unit test passes after this change.
Cc: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
Cc: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>
Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
---
Prerequisite for this patch is
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240207-fix_sparse_errors_checksum_tests-v6-0-4caa9629705b@rivosinc.com/
No idea how that was not detected before. Maybe I am missing something.
Note that test_csum_ipv6_magic still fails on 32-bit parisc systems
after this patch has been applied. That is a different problem.
arch/parisc/include/asm/checksum.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/parisc/include/asm/checksum.h b/arch/parisc/include/asm/checksum.h
index 3c43baca7b39..f705e5dd1074 100644
--- a/arch/parisc/include/asm/checksum.h
+++ b/arch/parisc/include/asm/checksum.h
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ static inline __sum16 ip_fast_csum(const void *iph, unsigned int ihl)
" addc %0, %5, %0\n"
" addc %0, %3, %0\n"
"1: ldws,ma 4(%1), %3\n"
-" addib,< 0, %2, 1b\n"
+" addib,> -1, %2, 1b\n"
" addc %0, %3, %0\n"
"\n"
" extru %0, 31, 16, %4\n"
--
2.39.2
next reply other threads:[~2024-02-10 17:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-10 17:55 Guenter Roeck [this message]
2024-02-13 21:04 ` [PATCH] parisc: Fix ip_fast_csum Charlie Jenkins
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20240210175526.3710522-1-linux@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=charlie@rivosinc.com \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).