From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.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, 03 Dec 2014 15:41:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <547F211B.3040905@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213BC46D@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com>
Hi Konstantin,
On 12/03/2014 01:59 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>> 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?
Yes
>> 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.
ok, so we are back between:
1/ (Jijiang's patch)
PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM /* packet is IPv4, and we want hw cksum */
PKT_TX_IPV6 /* packet is IPv6 */
PKT_TX_IPV4 /* packet is IPv4, and we don't want hw cksum */
with PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM and PKT_TX_IPV4 exclusive
and
2/
PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM /* we want hw IP cksum */
PKT_TX_IPV6 /* packet is IPv6 */
PKT_TX_IPV4 /* packet is IPv4 */
with PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM implies PKT_TX_IPV4
Solution 2/ looks better from a user point of view. Anyone else has an
opinion?
Regards,
Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-03 14:41 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
2014-12-03 14:41 ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
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=547F211B.3040905@6wind.com \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jijiang.liu@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.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).