From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20E5E9AB5 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 14:38:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Feb 2015 05:38:12 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,638,1418112000"; d="scan'208";a="670796135" Received: from pgsmsx105.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.96]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 24 Feb 2015 05:38:11 -0800 Received: from shsmsx101.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.4.153) by PGSMSX105.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.96) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:38:10 +0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.161]) by SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.192]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 21:38:09 +0800 From: "Zhang, Helin" To: Olivier MATZ , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 03/16] mbuf: add definitions of unified packet types Thread-Index: AQHQSpB/9qmyRYNB9Eu0DUlZVZzlvJz5nKJggAVrO4CAANEHsA== Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:38:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1422501365-12643-1-git-send-email-helin.zhang@intel.com> <1424156374-21768-1-git-send-email-helin.zhang@intel.com> <1424156374-21768-4-git-send-email-helin.zhang@intel.com> <54E30374.4010809@6wind.com> <54EC3FB7.60908@6wind.com> In-Reply-To: <54EC3FB7.60908@6wind.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 03/16] mbuf: add definitions of unified packet types X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 13:38:14 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 5:09 PM > To: Zhang, Helin; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 03/16] mbuf: add definitions of unified= packet > types >=20 > Hi Helin, >=20 > On 02/20/2015 03:26 PM, Zhang, Helin wrote: > >> On 02/17/2015 07:59 AM, Helin Zhang wrote: > >>> As there are only 6 bit flags in ol_flags for indicating packet > >>> types, which is not enough to describe all the possible packet types > >>> hardware can recognize. For example, i40e hardware can recognize > >>> more than 150 packet types. Unified packet type is composed of L2 > >>> type, L3 type, L4 type, tunnel type, inner L2 type, inner L3 type > >>> and inner L4 type fields, and can be stored in 'struct rte_mbuf' of > >>> 32 bits field 'packet_type'. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Helin Zhang > >> > >> A formal definition of each flag is still missing. I explained > >> several times why it's needed. We must be able to answer to these > >> questions: > >> > >> - If I'm developing a PMD, what fields should I check in the packet > >> to set a specific flag? > >> - If I'm developing an application, if a specific flag is set, what > >> checks can I skip? > >> > >> Example with RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4: > >> > >> - IP version field is 4 > >> - no IP options (header size is 20) > >> - layer 2 identified the packet as IP (ex: ethertype=3D0x800) > >> > >> I think we need such a definition for all packet types. > > You meant we need a detailed description of each packet type, right? > > If yes, I can add those information soon. Thanks for the helps! >=20 > Yes, I think this would be really helpful. OK. Got it. I will add them and send out v4 version. Thanks for your good s= uggestions! Regards, Helin >=20 > Thank you! > Olivier