Hi,team.
Some switches add padding bytes to packets smaller than 64 bytes that are
sent from outside.
However, in our netdev_tnl_push_ip_header processing, we directly set
l2_pad_size to 0.
I believe that l2_pad_size should be reassigned with the value it originally
carried.
After making t
>>
>> Hi,team.
>> Some switches add padding bytes to packets smaller than 64 bytes that
>> are sent from outside.
>> However, in our netdev_tnl_push_ip_header processing, we directly set
>> l2_pad_size to 0.
>> I believe that l2_pad_size should be reassigned with the value it originally
>> c
After detailed verification, I found that my previous modification had issues.
Directly modifying l2_pad_size causes the calculation of the outer UDP
checksum to be incorrect. Therefore, I made another revision, adding a new
inner_l2_pad_size, which seems more reasonable. With this change,
if pa
Hi,team.
During the forwarding process, we used bpf to capture
the pmd cutout time and found that the pmd process was
locked in the upcall process and was unable to process
the forwarding process.
Here I think it is not appropriate for the pmd process
and the upcall process of ovs-dpdk to be coup
