From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Igor Ryzhov <iryzhov@nfware.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: implement header_ops parse method
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 14:10:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0a5223b8-5b32-966a-7339-617957c7ba45@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAF+s_FzC+aAhJWMtjT=2ciJdCcWwL4nA7eJZo3+MeMJb-u6Mdg@mail.gmail.com>
On 1/24/2019 9:18 AM, Igor Ryzhov wrote:
> Hi Ferruh,
>
> What about this patch?
> Can you merge it as-is, or should I change it to use relevant eth_header_ops
> functions? Or maybe completely use eth_header_ops?
Hi Igor,
I am not clear about motivation of the patch, what use case enabled by this
patch? What is not working with current code?
I am for rejecting the patch without need justified.
And if the need is justified, still there is a question that why not use
'eth_header_parse()' directly but implement our copy?
And an extended question/investigation about why not use 'eth_header_ops', which
seems done intentionally but I am missing the reasoning.
>
> Best regards,
> Igor
>
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 10:07 PM Igor Ryzhov <iryzhov@nfware.com
> <mailto:iryzhov@nfware.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi Ferruh,
>
> header_ops.parse method is used by raw-sockets to fill sockaddr_ll structure.
> It is used, for example, in isisd for frrouting.
>
> Regarding your question about eth_header_ops – I, unfortunately, don't know
> why .cache and .cache_update are disabled for KNI.
> I also think that it will be better to use default eth_header_ops.
>
> Best regards,
> Igor
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:58 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com
> <mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com>> wrote:
>
> On 9/27/2018 1:02 AM, Igor Ryzhov wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Ryzhov <iryzhov@nfware.com
> <mailto:iryzhov@nfware.com>>
>
> Hi Igor,
>
> What is the motivation to add this support? What is enabled by this?
>
>
> Meanwhile, why we are not using eth_header_ops, which is already set by
> ether_setup().
> To disable .cache & .cache_update?
>
> If so why not using relevant eth_header_ops (eth_header,
> eth_header_parse ..)
> instead of implementing ours?
>
> > ---
> > kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c b/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c
> > index 7fcfa106c..128a5477c 100644
> > --- a/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c
> > +++ b/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c
> > @@ -678,6 +678,19 @@ kni_net_header(struct sk_buff *skb, struct
> net_device *dev,
> > return dev->hard_header_len;
> > }
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Extract hardware address from packet
> > + */
> > +static int
> > +kni_net_header_parse(const struct sk_buff *skb, unsigned char *haddr)
> > +{
> > + const struct ethhdr *eth = eth_hdr(skb);
> > +
> > + memcpy(haddr, eth->h_source, ETH_ALEN);
> > +
> > + return ETH_ALEN;
> > +}
> > +
> > /*
> > * Re-fill the eth header
> > */
> > @@ -739,6 +752,7 @@ kni_net_change_carrier(struct net_device *dev,
> bool new_carrier)
> >
> > static const struct header_ops kni_net_header_ops = {
> > .create = kni_net_header,
> > + .parse = kni_net_header_parse,
> > #ifdef HAVE_REBUILD_HEADER
> > .rebuild = kni_net_rebuild_header,
> > #endif /* < 4.1.0 */
> >
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-24 14:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-27 0:02 Igor Ryzhov
2018-09-29 7:21 ` Stephen Hemminger
2018-09-29 19:19 ` Igor Ryzhov
2018-09-30 8:22 ` Igor Ryzhov
2018-10-02 16:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-11-30 19:07 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-01-24 9:18 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-01-24 14:10 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2019-01-24 16:35 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-01-24 17:15 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-01-24 18:05 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-08 16:59 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-08 16:59 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-09 20:30 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-09 20:30 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-10 10:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-10 10:30 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-12 14:52 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-12 14:52 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-12 14:53 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-12 14:53 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-12 17:12 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-12 17:12 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-12 17:15 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-12 17:15 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-15 8:37 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-15 8:37 ` Igor Ryzhov
2019-04-15 15:49 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-15 15:49 ` Ferruh Yigit
2019-04-19 10:36 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-04-19 10:36 ` Thomas Monjalon
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=0a5223b8-5b32-966a-7339-617957c7ba45@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=iryzhov@nfware.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/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).