You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When VIRTIO_NET_F_HASH_REPORT is negotiated, the driver currently computes its own Toeplitz hash and compares it against the device-reported hash. Based on the presence of framesRSSError counter, this appears to be an intentional verification design, not an oversight:
framesRSSError counter exists specifically to track hash mismatches
TraceNoPrefix logs the mismatch details for debugging
The comparison logic is explicit and well-structured
Question
Given that this verification mechanism was intentionally designed (likely for development/validation phase), should we now optimize it for production by directly using device-reported hash when available?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Background
When
VIRTIO_NET_F_HASH_REPORTis negotiated, the driver currently computes its own Toeplitz hash and compares it against the device-reported hash. Based on the presence offramesRSSErrorcounter, this appears to be an intentional verification design, not an oversight:Evidence of Intentional Design
framesRSSErrorcounter exists specifically to track hash mismatchesQuestion
Given that this verification mechanism was intentionally designed (likely for development/validation phase), should we now optimize it for production by directly using device-reported hash when available?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions