From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Cc: "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] mbuf: fix bitmask of Tx offload flags
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 16:05:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170126160516.398ac002@glumotte.dev.6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F10D0CB@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
On Thu, 26 Jan 2017 14:58:08 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Jingjng,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jingjing Wu
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 11:48 AM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Cc: Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] mbuf: fix bitmask of Tx offload
> > flags
> >
> > Some Tx offload flags are missed in Bitmask of all supported packet
> > Tx offload features flags.
> > This patch fixes it.
>
> Not sure what it exactly fixes?
> As I remember these flags don't specify any TX offload for HW to
> perform, But just provide information to the TX function.
> Again, why only i40e code is modified?
> As I remember we have the same code in other PMDs too.
> Konstantin
>
> >
> > Fixes: 4fb7e803eb1a ("ethdev: add Tx preparation")
> > Signed-off-by: Jingjing Wu <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
> > ---
> > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 4 ++++
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > index bfce9f4..e57a4d2 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > @@ -295,8 +295,12 @@ extern "C" {
> > */
> > #define PKT_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK ( \
> > PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM | \
> > + PKT_TX_IPV4 | \
> > + PKT_TX_IPV6 | \
> > PKT_TX_L4_MASK | \
> > PKT_TX_OUTER_IP_CKSUM | \
> > + PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV4 | \
> > + PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV6 | \
> > PKT_TX_TCP_SEG | \
> > PKT_TX_QINQ_PKT | \
> > PKT_TX_VLAN_PKT | \
> > --
> > 2.4.11
>
Also, it looks like MACSEC is missing. To avoid forgetting flags in
the future, what do you think about doing the following (not tested)?
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index b3cccfc..aa1dc76 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -182,9 +182,11 @@ extern "C" {
*/
#define PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP (1ULL << 17)
-/* add new RX flags here */
+/* add new RX flags here, and update __PKT_RX_NEXT */
+#define __PKT_RX_NEXT (1ULL << 18)
-/* add new TX flags here */
+/* add new TX flags here, and update __PKT_TX_NEXT */
+#define __PKT_TX_NEXT (1ULL << 43)
/**
* Offload the MACsec. This flag must be set by the application to enable
@@ -295,17 +297,16 @@ extern "C" {
#define PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV6 (1ULL << 60)
/**
+ * Bitmask of all supported packet Rx offload features flags,
+ * which can be set for packet.
+ */
+#define PKT_RX_OFFLOAD_MASK (__PKT_RX_NEXT - 1)
+
+/**
* Bitmask of all supported packet Tx offload features flags,
* which can be set for packet.
*/
-#define PKT_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK ( \
- PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM | \
- PKT_TX_L4_MASK | \
- PKT_TX_OUTER_IP_CKSUM | \
- PKT_TX_TCP_SEG | \
- PKT_TX_QINQ_PKT | \
- PKT_TX_VLAN_PKT | \
- PKT_TX_TUNNEL_MASK)
+#define PKT_TX_OFFLOAD_MASK ((~(__PKT_TX_NEXT - 1)) & 0x1fffffffffffffff)
#define __RESERVED (1ULL << 61) /**< reserved for future mbuf use */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-26 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-24 11:47 Jingjing Wu
2017-01-24 11:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] net/i40e: fix bitmask of supported Tx flags Jingjing Wu
2017-01-26 14:58 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] mbuf: fix bitmask of Tx offload flags Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-01-26 15:05 ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2017-01-26 15:35 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-01-26 15:57 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-01-26 16:33 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-01-24 11:50 Jingjing Wu
2017-01-26 14:19 ` Ferruh Yigit
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=20170126160516.398ac002@glumotte.dev.6wind.com \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.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 NNTP newsgroup(s).