DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "John Daley (johndale)" <johndale@cisco.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "konstantin.ananyev@intel.com" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	"helin.zhang@intel.com" <helin.zhang@intel.com>,
	"adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com" <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>,
	"rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com" <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>,
	"alejandro.lucero@netronome.com" <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>,
	"sony.chacko@qlogic.com" <sony.chacko@qlogic.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] mbuf: new flag when vlan is stripped
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 09:59:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5742B87C.5070308@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d13210e8f4d747c0841d793e5b9c7fe6@XCH-RCD-007.cisco.com>

Hi John,

On 05/12/2016 10:36 PM, John Daley (johndale) wrote:
>> ... This is a draft patch that implements what was previously
>> discussed, except the packet_type, which does not exist for vlan
>> today (and I think it is not mandatory for now, let's do it in
>> another patch).
>> 
>> After doing this patch, it appeared that ixgbe was the only driver
>> that had a different behavior for the PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT flag. An
>> alternative to this patch would be to only change the behavior of
>> the ixgbe driver, and just document better document the
>> PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT flags in rte_mbuf.h without adding new flags. I
>> think this is a better option.
>> 
>> Comments are welcome.
>> 
> There are applications depending on the current behavior of
> PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT as confusing as it may be.  I know of one that has
> VLAN stripping disabled and uses the flag to determine if the packet
> delivered to the app has a VLAN tag. This is actually how the flag
> behaves for ixgbe, and they patched enic and maybe other drivers to
> act accordingly. To avoid breaking the app (and any others like it),
> I think we should keep the flag behavior the same and add the new
> flag PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED .

OK, thanks for your comment.
So it means the v1 will be the same than RFC. I'm submitting it.

> We should follow on with the new packet type since it enables a nice
> performance improvement by not forcing apps to break open the packet
> just to see if there is a VLAN tag.

Yep, agree.

Thanks,
Olivier

  reply	other threads:[~2016-05-23  8:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-04-21 23:36 [dpdk-dev] PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT when VLAN stripping is disabled John Daley (johndale)
2016-04-25 12:02 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-04-25 13:50   ` Olivier Matz
2016-04-25 16:17     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-04-26  0:16     ` John Daley (johndale)
2016-04-28 14:43       ` Olivier MATZ
2016-05-10 16:24         ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC] mbuf: new flag when vlan is stripped Olivier Matz
2016-05-12 20:36           ` John Daley (johndale)
2016-05-23  7:59             ` Olivier Matz [this message]
2016-05-23  8:46           ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] mbuf: new flag when Vlan " Olivier Matz
2016-05-23  8:59             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-05-23  9:12               ` Olivier Matz
2016-05-23  9:23                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-05-23  9:38                   ` Olivier Matz
2016-05-23  9:20             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-05-23  9:40               ` Olivier Matz
2016-05-27 14:33             ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Olivier Matz
2016-06-13 11:41               ` Olivier Matz
2016-06-13 14:42               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-06-13 16:07                 ` Olivier Matz
2016-06-13 16:31                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-06-14  8:32                     ` Olivier MATZ
2016-06-14  9:15                       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-06-14  9:34                         ` Olivier MATZ
2016-06-15 11:48               ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Olivier Matz
2016-06-15 12:33                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-06-15 15:20                   ` 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=5742B87C.5070308@6wind.com \
    --to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com \
    --cc=alejandro.lucero@netronome.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=helin.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=johndale@cisco.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com \
    --cc=sony.chacko@qlogic.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).