From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F049C1B366 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 08:48:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 718A920BF9; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 02:48:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 26 Jan 2018 02:48:53 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=21FdtB4zsbncDwOZLk3LWno1uX a442zWhDJrl+7aTPU=; b=EPkQoaRPN/MwLHo63AlocepSN7S+nSg3xCFctud9/I nDLJvhAliNCk83d9jwbL9P5DXdfWe9EY0yhZA/Bmi56+eEB30GAjz4inUj2CEP4k KjqdO32XeXMZZiEfSSd8/3RkGrjF1358YbHLViYfgCTfzLAX3t3emOxeA+2JuIrn o= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=21FdtB 4zsbncDwOZLk3LWno1uXa442zWhDJrl+7aTPU=; b=Kd95BO1KqwhimDzmrG8rqI 7sbTX3i+RB9qbEveMM4VbfIXIdxE52v1tf8eVO7VFIher/Sum0P7bjVxUD5dtPxH dR/F3txqf2Od++qFJnuInbvsXorxbknxV9juLaf4txfWYSPatEzIoAMNk/QB2zSQ k0jOsTlsGsLcJ7IHn2aS2scKO++mRAG+aJbSr2RnV9Tqbg0hgcrOi63urQivZePJ QtN1/SCOrg1wpKjnEQjQbYPQJS1WsrVk3DTEDNNSVtPDx4kKvjnUpyctwGnopxPu z9IzzPCcDUYryqra4itGWYcH4KuOPYTIW26FzkQ+lpfU+RS2Ba3v4Allord85pVw == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2B07224A6F; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 02:48:53 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Lu, Wenzhuo" Cc: Moti Haimovsky , dev@dpdk.org, "shahafs@mellanox.com" , "Yigit, Ferruh" Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 08:48:11 +0100 Message-ID: <6183373.cbWzoGE1aT@xps> In-Reply-To: <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093B721CA4@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1516695081-178919-1-git-send-email-motih@mellanox.com> <60691740.PPs9Gye6m2@xps> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093B721CA4@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: do not enable Rx offloads by default 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 07:48:54 -0000 26/01/2018 08:30, Lu, Wenzhuo: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 25/01/2018 02:11, Lu, Wenzhuo: > > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c > > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c > > > > @@ -305,9 +305,7 @@ struct fwd_engine * fwd_engines[] = { > > > > */ > > > > struct rte_eth_rxmode rx_mode = { > > > > .max_rx_pkt_len = ETHER_MAX_LEN, /**< Default maximum frame > > > > length. */ > > > > - .offloads = (DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_FILTER | > > > > - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_STRIP | > > > > - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CRC_STRIP), > > > > + .offloads = 0, > > > > > > Change the default behavior may trigger other problems. I think TX offload > > could be a good reference. Get the capability and check what's supported > > first, then ignore the not supported functions with printing a warning but > > not block anything... > > > > I agree that we should check the capabilities before requesting an offload. > > But I disagree on another point: we should not enable an offload if the user > > did not request it explicitly. It makes things unclear. > > This is a testing tool, it should be close to the ethdev API behavior. > > > > Why these offload flags are silently enabled? > > I don't think it's silently. It's a global configuration. In this case, testpmd is the user, it does request it explicitly. If it's not so explicit, maybe we can consider moving all the configuration to a specific configure file. > Talking about why it's enabled by default. Hard to figure out the history. To my opinion, the original designer wants to simulate the common case. Please do not justify a design mistake by history. This is a test tool, so we don't care about the common case. A test tool should not try to guess the best configuration. Only the user should decide the configuration to apply, and the default should be empty, as the API is.