From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
"Liu, Jijiang" <jijiang.liu@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] mbuf:add three TX ol_flags and repalce PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 12:59:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213BC46D@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <547EF6E9.5040000@6wind.com>
Hi Oliver,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2014 11:41 AM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] mbuf:add three TX ol_flags and repalce PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM
>
> Hi Jijiang,
>
> On 12/02/2014 04:06 PM, Jijiang Liu wrote:
> > Replace PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM with PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT in order to indicate a packet is an UDP tunneling packet, and
> introduce 3 TX offload flags for outer IP TX checksum, which are PKT_TX_OUTER_IP_CKSUM, PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV4 and
> PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV6 respectively;Rework csum forward engine and i40e PMD due to these changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jijiang Liu <jijiang.liu@intel.com>
> > ---
> > app/test-pmd/csumonly.c | 9 +++++++--
> > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c | 7 ++++++-
> > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 11 ++++++++++-
> > lib/librte_pmd_i40e/i40e_rxtx.c | 6 +++---
> > 4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
> > index d8c080a..9094967 100644
> > --- a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
> > +++ b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
> > @@ -257,7 +257,7 @@ process_outer_cksums(void *outer_l3_hdr, uint16_t outer_ethertype,
> > uint64_t ol_flags = 0;
> >
> > if (testpmd_ol_flags & TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_CKSUM)
> > - ol_flags |= PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM;
> > + ol_flags |= PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT;
> >
> > if (outer_ethertype == _htons(ETHER_TYPE_IPv4)) {
> > ipv4_hdr->hdr_checksum = 0;
> > @@ -470,7 +470,12 @@ pkt_burst_checksum_forward(struct fwd_stream *fs)
> > { PKT_TX_UDP_CKSUM, PKT_TX_L4_MASK },
> > { PKT_TX_TCP_CKSUM, PKT_TX_L4_MASK },
> > { PKT_TX_SCTP_CKSUM, PKT_TX_L4_MASK },
> > - { PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM, PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM },
> > + { PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT, PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT },
> > + { PKT_TX_IPV4, PKT_TX_IPV4 },
> > + { PKT_TX_IPV6, PKT_TX_IPV6 },
> > + { PKT_TX_OUTER_IP_CKSUM, PKT_TX_OUTER_IP_CKSUM },
> > + { PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV4, PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV4 },
> > + { PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV6, PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV6 },
> > { PKT_TX_TCP_SEG, PKT_TX_TCP_SEG },
>
> I still think having a flag IPV4 + another flag IP_CHECKSUM is not
> appropriate.
Sorry, didn't get you here.
Are you talking about our discussion should PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM and PKT_TX_IPV4 be mutually exclusive or not?
> I though Konstantin agreed on other flags, but I may
> have misunderstood:
>
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-November/009070.html
In that mail, I was talking about my suggestion to make PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM, PKT_TX_IPV4 and PKT_TX_IPV6 to occupy 2 bits.
Something like:
#define PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM (1 << X)
#define PKT_TX_IPV6 (2 << X)
#define PKT_TX_IPV4 (3 << X)
"Even better, if we can squeeze these 3 flags into 2 bits.
Would save us 2 bits, plus might be handy, as in the PMD you can do:
switch (ol_flags & TX_L3_MASK) {
case TX_IPV4:
...
break;
case TX_IPV6:
...
break;
case TX_IP_CKSUM:
...
break;
}"
As you pointed out, it will break backward compatibility.
I agreed with that and self-NACKed it.
>
>
> Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-03 13:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-02 15:06 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/3] i40e VXLAN TX checksum rework Jijiang Liu
2014-12-02 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/3] mbuf:redefine three TX ol_flags Jijiang Liu
2014-12-03 11:35 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-02 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] mbuf:add three TX ol_flags and repalce PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM Jijiang Liu
2014-12-03 11:41 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-03 12:59 ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2014-12-03 14:41 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-04 2:08 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-12-04 10:23 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-04 10:45 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-12-04 11:03 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-04 13:51 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-04 22:56 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-05 4:17 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-12-04 6:52 ` Zhang, Helin
2014-12-04 7:52 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-12-04 10:19 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-04 13:47 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-04 21:42 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-05 1:15 ` Zhang, Helin
2014-12-05 11:11 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-02 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] mbuf:replace the inner_l2_len and the inner_l3_len fields Jijiang Liu
2014-12-03 11:45 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-05 11:12 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-02 15:40 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/3] i40e VXLAN TX checksum rework Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-05 16:07 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-12-07 11:46 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213BC46D@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jijiang.liu@intel.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.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).