From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Flavio Leitner <fbl@sysclose.org>
Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
dev@dpdk.org, maxime.coquelin@redhat.com, i.maximets@ovn.org,
Keith Wiles <keith.wiles@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] net/tap: do not touch Tx offload flags
Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 09:41:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210408074159.GQ1650@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YG4S6/rUguRiKYf5@p50.lan>
On Wed, Apr 07, 2021 at 05:15:39PM -0300, Flavio Leitner wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 11:52:40AM +0200, David Marchand wrote:
> > Tx offload flags are of the application responsibility.
> > Leave the mbuf alone and check for TSO where needed.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> > ---
>
> The patch looks good, but maybe a better approach would be
> to change the documentation to require the TCP_CKSUM flag
> when TCP_SEG is used, otherwise this flag adjusting needs
> to be replicated every time TCP_SEG is used.
>
> The above could break existing applications, so perhaps doing
> something like below would be better and backwards compatible?
> Then we can remove those places tweaking the flags completely.
As a first step, I suggest to document that:
- applications must set TCP_CKSUM when setting TCP_SEG
- pmds must suppose that TCP_CKSUM is set when TCP_SEG is set
This is clearer that what we have today, and I think it does not break
anything. This will guide apps in the correct direction, facilitating
an eventual future PMD change.
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> index c17dc95c5..6a0c2cdd9 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_core.h
> @@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ extern "C" {
> * - if it's IPv4, set the PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM flag
> * - fill the mbuf offload information: l2_len, l3_len, l4_len, tso_segsz
> */
> -#define PKT_TX_TCP_SEG (1ULL << 50)
> +#define PKT_TX_TCP_SEG (1ULL << 50) | PKT_TX_TCP_CKSUM
>
> /** TX IEEE1588 packet to timestamp. */
> #define PKT_TX_IEEE1588_TMST (1ULL << 51)
I'm afraid some applications or drivers use extended bit manipulations
to do the conversion from/to another domain (like hardware descriptors
or application-specific flags). They may expect this constant to be a
uniq flag.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-08 7:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-01 9:52 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/5] Offload flags fixes David Marchand
2021-04-01 9:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/5] mbuf: mark old offload flag as deprecated David Marchand
2021-04-07 20:14 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-08 7:23 ` Olivier Matz
2021-04-08 8:41 ` David Marchand
2021-04-01 9:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] net/tap: do not touch Tx offload flags David Marchand
2021-04-07 20:15 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-08 7:41 ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2021-04-08 11:21 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-08 12:05 ` Olivier Matz
2021-04-08 12:58 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-09 13:30 ` Olivier Matz
2021-04-09 16:55 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-28 12:17 ` David Marchand
2021-04-08 12:16 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-04-08 7:53 ` Olivier Matz
2021-04-28 12:12 ` David Marchand
2021-04-01 9:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/5] net/virtio: " David Marchand
2021-04-13 14:17 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-04-01 9:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/5] net/virtio: refactor Tx offload helper David Marchand
2021-04-08 13:05 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-09 2:31 ` Ruifeng Wang
2021-04-01 9:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/5] vhost: fix offload flags in Rx path David Marchand
2021-04-08 8:28 ` Olivier Matz
2021-04-08 18:38 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-13 15:27 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-04-27 17:09 ` David Marchand
2021-04-27 17:19 ` David Marchand
2021-04-29 8:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] Offload flags fixes David Marchand
2021-04-29 8:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] mbuf: mark old offload flag as deprecated David Marchand
2021-04-29 12:14 ` Lance Richardson
2021-04-29 16:45 ` Ajit Khaparde
2021-04-29 8:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] net/virtio: do not touch Tx offload flags David Marchand
2021-04-29 13:51 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-29 8:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] net/virtio: refactor Tx offload helper David Marchand
2021-04-29 12:59 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-04-29 8:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] vhost: fix offload flags in Rx path David Marchand
2021-04-29 13:30 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-04-29 13:31 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-04-29 20:21 ` David Marchand
2021-04-30 8:38 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-04-29 20:09 ` David Marchand
2021-04-29 18:39 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-04-29 19:18 ` David Marchand
2021-05-03 13:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] Offload flags fixes David Marchand
2021-05-03 13:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] mbuf: mark old offload flag as deprecated David Marchand
2021-05-03 14:02 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-05-03 14:12 ` David Marchand
2021-05-03 13:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] net/virtio: do not touch Tx offload flags David Marchand
2021-05-03 13:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] net/virtio: refactor Tx offload helper David Marchand
2021-05-03 13:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] vhost: fix offload flags in Rx path David Marchand
2021-05-03 15:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] Offload flags fixes Maxime Coquelin
2021-05-03 16:21 ` David Marchand
2021-05-03 16:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/3] " David Marchand
2021-05-03 16:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] net/virtio: do not touch Tx offload flags David Marchand
2021-05-03 16:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] net/virtio: refactor Tx offload helper David Marchand
2021-05-03 16:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] vhost: fix offload flags in Rx path David Marchand
2021-05-04 11:07 ` Flavio Leitner
2021-05-08 6:24 ` Wang, Yinan
2021-05-12 3:29 ` Wang, Yinan
2021-05-12 15:20 ` David Marchand
2021-05-13 6:34 ` Wang, Yinan
2021-05-04 8:29 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/3] Offload flags fixes Maxime Coquelin
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=20210408074159.GQ1650@platinum \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=fbl@sysclose.org \
--cc=i.maximets@ovn.org \
--cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.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).