From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13388A0521; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 12:48:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 995D6C84C; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 12:48:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73215C840 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2020 12:48:32 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: gpnIwl1XFAGOKCn2Kah7nnatf+U3aqpnch2+C6PYfcV77wO0LBJc2gG5BgX3OEeljDqDqAGpwO Gmci15cmaLgA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9792"; a="155858480" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,444,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="155858480" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Nov 2020 03:48:31 -0800 IronPort-SDR: mjda5v2y0Cn3V1KbiD5fzV259fDVVkLPJPUknsurz5CEAe68vW+6lute9W4/b4nj4JajFNy2V6 LgVewbfL15rA== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,444,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="537989759" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.219.143]) ([10.213.219.143]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 02 Nov 2020 03:48:29 -0800 To: SteveX Yang , dev@dpdk.org Cc: konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, beilei.xing@intel.com, wenzhuo.lu@intel.com, bernard.iremonger@intel.com, qiming.yang@intel.com, mdr@ashroe.eu, nhorman@tuxdriver.com References: <20201028030334.30300-1-stevex.yang@intel.com> <20201102085234.72779-1-stevex.yang@intel.com> <20201102085234.72779-2-stevex.yang@intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <13f49ee0-8cee-5f1b-e3bb-0d3a54e9e189@intel.com> Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:48:25 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201102085234.72779-2-stevex.yang@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/2] app/testpmd: fix max rx packet length for VLAN packets X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 11/2/2020 8:52 AM, SteveX Yang wrote: > When the max rx packet length is smaller than the sum of mtu size and > ether overhead size, it should be enlarged, otherwise the VLAN packets > will be dropped. > > Fixes: 35b2d13fd6fd ("net: add rte prefix to ether defines") > > Signed-off-by: SteveX Yang Reviewed-by: Ferruh Yigit