From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80B4CA0562; Mon, 3 May 2021 18:21:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 096C440150; Mon, 3 May 2021 18:21:40 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C3C04014E for ; Mon, 3 May 2021 18:21:38 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1620058898; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=YUe+/3InTNDvorZw8dalKFljR6eUuh/Tdnnbucoih3I=; b=cH87pau+ejJ6UnT8Jh8vbq2c+wmS9D0WLTJGy5k0NFplkwRGOZm7dhJesD4w5Ml0fedy/V ipsRFTZ+dnQEeFv0gfUn02t4NZ27alNs57qd/S0dShgsOT/gd9vETZLn0tIz3LIU9NGi0n yOf3cAC66FEsQHT27XzkMqqm5ERsAfw= Received: from mail-vs1-f72.google.com (mail-vs1-f72.google.com [209.85.217.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-560-0FUDVnkvODSeHQ1pOMalFQ-1; Mon, 03 May 2021 12:21:36 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 0FUDVnkvODSeHQ1pOMalFQ-1 Received: by mail-vs1-f72.google.com with SMTP id o17-20020a67e1510000b0290222447a3735so3036561vsl.2 for ; Mon, 03 May 2021 09:21:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=YUe+/3InTNDvorZw8dalKFljR6eUuh/Tdnnbucoih3I=; b=espxUTTbQT+gH2U7SYJ9jk9UXdveQ7UTBWfZsiecsmXKjo+EmcZMhPqUwxGgTp8Xh9 /UZwkQd4icbcDaEi/cYmfwDBfxs13VWfJZWvnpR57mGGYw0oL4OZ9akMpvewVCeUwfBS oeXOXUgFXVjztb7fhu+CzCFTRg/EPtiz8YtK97Nd8ht2gW5CUSJWRpmgzvVfg+Nb8U8h Ei0Gx+ylfoawFR3WjG6Mup7sO+w4TfcbSpGMfKbhGmLSO/d0kOwjvcSj9NNcia0SfeQh kUotc5vt9PZiJNNW/9ljnGQCTUkwOinLS1Fv5HFm6GyKnUoEc5Ub43t2Rzfk9ixtkcEw iKog== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531HDiYhGWWGwuIC0rIXcyJct7cCnjddSMZ7QloDBSYP7qd/ebzo m697DUNAavq7wT5rD+nzw7uGtx0IlTW48bwdQjs3X0Dl5OC61rUzPUJCNFu71jdds+nGUAikatA 0TpdrPpXWW27za71F1O8= X-Received: by 2002:a67:f791:: with SMTP id j17mr17305905vso.5.1620058895153; Mon, 03 May 2021 09:21:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzLhHwq5oyKLbe40XxY8J0PeJFgO/ov69DjHQz/TSI2WAgVi6KFRCLElKddDvJvovCma7H0eaayrNfYEReH6gk= X-Received: by 2002:a67:f791:: with SMTP id j17mr17305879vso.5.1620058894941; Mon, 03 May 2021 09:21:34 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210401095243.18211-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20210503132646.16076-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Mon, 3 May 2021 18:21:23 +0200 Message-ID: To: Maxime Coquelin Cc: dev , Olivier Matz , Flavio Leitner , Ilya Maximets , "Xia, Chenbo" , Ian Stokes Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/4] Offload flags fixes X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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 Mon, May 3, 2021 at 5:24 PM Maxime Coquelin wrote: > On 5/3/21 3:26 PM, David Marchand wrote: > > The important part is the last patch on vhost handling of offloading > > requests coming from a virtio guest interface. > > > > The rest are small fixes that I accumulated while reviewing the mbuf > > offload flags. > > > > On this last patch, it has the potential of breaking existing > > applications using the vhost library (OVS being impacted). > > I did not mark it for backport. > > > > Changes since v2: > > - kept behavior untouched (to avoid breaking ABI) and introduced a new > > flag to select the new behavior, > > > > Changes since v1: > > - dropped patch on net/tap, > > - added missing bits in example/vhost, > > - relaxed checks on VIRTIO_NET_HDR_GSO_ECN and VIRTIO_NET_HDR_GSO_UDP, > > > > Patch 4 does not apply on top of next-virtio/main branch. > Could you please send a rebased version? The conflict is with Balazs rework. Ok, preparing v4. -- David Marchand