Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) replied on github web page:

line 245
@@ -1165,6 +1167,8 @@ static int ipsec_out_esp(odp_packet_t *pkt,
                                 ipsec_offset + _ODP_ESPHDR_LEN,
                                 state->iv + ipsec_sa->salt_length);
+       _odp_packet_set_data(*pkt, esptrl_offset - esptrl.pad_len - tfc_len,
+                            0xa5, tfc_len);

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.
updated_at 2018-02-22 02:28:33

Reply via email to