DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Xueming(Steven) Li" <xuemingl@mellanox.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
	Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
	Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>,
	"Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/5] ethdev: introduce Tx generic tunnel offloads
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 15:20:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <VI1PR05MB1678ABAC0492D2B421AD4830ACFB0@VI1PR05MB1678.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3030421.JaM4VfFdR3@xps>

Hi Thomas,

Yes, would update in next version, thanks for reminding.

Regards,
Xueming

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2018 4:21 AM
> To: Xueming(Steven) Li <xuemingl@mellanox.com>
> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Olivier MATZ
> <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing
> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>; Yongseok
> Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>; Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/5] ethdev: introduce Tx generic tunnel
> offloads
> 
> Xueming,
> 
> We already discussed privately some time ago about this API.
> You got some questions from me, from Olivier and from Konstantin.
> The next version should answer the questions asked.
> 
> When defining an API, the doxygen documentation must explain precisely
> what must be set, when and why.
> The documentation must be sufficient to allow users using it, and to allow
> PMD writers to implement it.
> 
> I think it cannot be properly reviewed until we clearly understand the API
> and the HW requirements/expectations.
> 
> Hope this helps to understand what is expected for integrating such API.
> 
> 
> 30/01/2018 18:54, Xueming(Steven) Li:
> 
> > > > > > > > > > > > This patch introduce new TX offloads flag for
> > > > > > > > > > > > devices that support tunnel agnostic checksum and
> TSO offloads.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > The support from the device is for inner and outer
> > > > > > > > > > > > checksums on IPV4/TCP/UDP and TSO for *any packet
> > > > > > > > > > > > with the following
> > > > > > > format*:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > < some headers > / [optional IPv4/IPv6] /
> > > > > > > > > > > > [optional TCP/UDP] / <some
> > > > > > > > > > > > headers> / [optional inner IPv4/IPv6] / [optional
> > > > > > > > > > > > headers> TCP/UDP]
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > For example the following packets can use this
> feature:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > 1. eth / ipv4 / udp / VXLAN / ip / tcp 2. eth /
> > > > > > > > > > > > ipv4 / GRE / MPLS /
> > > > > > > > > > > > ipv4 / udp
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > So in terms of usage - what is the difference with
> > > > > > > > > > > current TSO
> > > > > > > types?
> > > > > > > > > > > Konstantin
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Traditionally, HW only recognize "known" tunnel type,
> > > > > > > > > > do TSO calculation based on L3/L4 headers known to
> > > > > > > > > > tunnel type. For example, it must be
> > > > > > > > > > L2 header after VXLAN, then L3. While this Generic
> > > > > > > > > > offloading provides inner/outer L3/L4 header info(len
> > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > offset) to HW, and thus tunnel info become less
> important.
> > > > > > > > > > Please note the MPLS over GRE tunnel in last example
> above.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Ok, but I wonder when the user would like to do TSO on
> > > > > > > > > tunnel packet, for this offload - would he need to do
> > > > > > > > > something differently from what he has to do now:
> > > > > > > > > raise PKT_TX_TCP_SEG and related flags, raise
> > > > > > > > > appropriate
> > > > > > > > > PKT_TX_TUNNEL_* flag, fill l2_len, l3_len,
> > > > > > > l4_len,tso_segsz,outer_l2_len,outer_l3_len?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yes, these fields are sufficient except PKT_TX_TUNNEL_*,
> > > > > > > > major target of this new feature is to support "unknown"
> > > > > > > > tunnel offloading, it
> > > > > > > supports "known"
> > > > > > > > tunnel type as well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ok, but user would still need to set some flag to indicate
> > > > > > > that this is a tunnel packet, and he wants TSO over it, right?
> > > > > > > For pre-defined tunnel types it can be one of
> > > > > > > PKT_TX_TUNNEL_* (which actually means that user still have
> > > > > > > to know tunnel type
> > > > > > > anyway?) But for some not defined tunnel type - what it would
> be?
> > > > > > > Konstantin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As this feature target to TX path, Outer length as tunnel
> > > > > > indication, leave it empty if tunnel not defined.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, I didn't get it.
> > > > > We need to let PMD know that it is a tunnel packet, right?
> > > > > So we do need to raise PKT_TX_TUNNEL_* flag.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > In my current code, mbuf.outer_l2_len is used to test tunnel packet.
> > > > Agree a new tunnel flag would be better.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But I think it good to define something like:
> > > > > >  	PKT_TX_TUNNEL_GENERIC = PKT_TX_TUNNEL_MASK
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, that's an option, I would probably name it
> PKT_TX_TUNNEL_UNKNOWN.
> > > > >
> > > > > > And a new flag PKT_TX_OUTER_UDP, how do you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > Not sure why do we need it?
> > > > > HW still needs to know outer_l4_type to be able to work correctly?
> > > >
> > > > For tunnel type like vxlan, if outer UDP present, hw has to update
> > > > UDP length field for each TSO packet segment.
> > >
> > > I understand that, but I thought that HW is smart enough to parse
> > > the header and recognize outer L3/L4 type  - as it is a 'generic'
> > > tunneling (sorry I am not familiar with MLX HW at all).
> >
> > It might be useful if the outer encapsulation not regular, for example
> MPLS.
> >
> > > From what you saying - that assumption was wrong and user still
> > > need to provide some packet-type info at  least about outer headers,
> right?
> > > So what else need to be set?
> > > Probably PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV*, might be something else?
> >
> > Sorry for the confusion, besides optional outer UDP type, still need
> > PKT_TX_IPV4/6 and PKT_TX_OUTER_IPV4/6


  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-31 15:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-09 14:11 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/6] Support generic tunnel TX csum and TSO Xueming Li
2018-01-09 14:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/6] net/mlx5: support tx swp tunnel offloading Xueming Li
2018-01-29 15:08   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/5] ethdev: introduce Tx generic tunnel offloads Xueming Li
2018-01-29 16:49     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-01-30  3:01       ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-30 13:28         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-01-30 15:27           ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-30 15:33             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-01-30 15:47               ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-30 16:02                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-01-30 16:10                   ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-30 17:04                     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-01-30 17:54                       ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-30 20:21                         ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-01-31 15:20                           ` Xueming(Steven) Li [this message]
2018-01-31 15:17                         ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-29 15:08   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/5] app/testpmd: testpmd support " Xueming Li
2018-01-29 15:08   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/5] net/mlx5: separate TSO function in Tx data path Xueming Li
2018-01-29 15:08   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/5] net/mlx5: support generic tunnel offloading Xueming Li
2018-01-29 15:08   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] net/mlx5: allow max 192B TSO inline header length Xueming Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/7] support generic tunnel Tx checksum and TSO Xueming Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/7] ethdev: introduce Tx generic tunnel L3/L4 offload Xueming Li
2018-03-21  1:40     ` Yongseok Koh
2018-03-22 13:55       ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-03-28 12:52         ` Olivier Matz
2018-04-04  8:20           ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/7] app/testpmd: testpmd support Tx generic tunnel offloads Xueming Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/7] app/testpmd: add more GRE extension to csum engine Xueming Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/7] app/testpmd: introduce VXLAN GPE to csum forwarding engine Xueming Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 5/7] net/mlx5: separate TSO function in Tx data path Xueming Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/7] net/mlx5: support generic tunnel offloading Xueming Li
2018-03-05 14:51   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 7/7] net/mlx5: allow max 192B TSO inline header length Xueming Li
2018-04-08 12:32   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/4] support Tx generic tunnel checksum and TSO Xueming Li
2018-04-17 14:43     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/2] " Xueming Li
2018-04-17 14:47     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/2] ethdev: introduce generic IP/UDP " Xueming Li
2018-04-17 21:21       ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-17 14:49     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] app/testpmd: testpmd support Tx generic tunnel offloads Xueming Li
2018-04-18 13:38     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/2] support Tx generic tunnel checksum and TSO Xueming Li
2018-04-18 13:58     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] ethdev: introduce generic IP/UDP " Xueming Li
2018-04-18 14:28       ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-18 16:45         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-04-18 18:02           ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-23  9:55             ` Olivier Matz
2018-04-20 12:48       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/2] support Tx generic " Xueming Li
2018-04-23 11:36         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 " Xueming Li
2018-04-23 16:17           ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-23 11:36         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/2] ethdev: introduce generic IP/UDP " Xueming Li
2018-04-23 11:49           ` Xueming Li
2018-04-23 11:36         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/2] app/testpmd: testpmd support Tx generic tunnel offloads Xueming Li
2018-04-20 12:48       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/2] ethdev: introduce generic IP/UDP tunnel checksum and TSO Xueming Li
2018-04-23  9:59         ` Olivier Matz
2018-04-20 12:48       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/2] app/testpmd: testpmd support Tx generic tunnel offloads Xueming Li
2018-04-18 13:59     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 " Xueming Li
2018-04-08 12:32   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: introduce generic IP/UDP tunnel checksum and TSO Xueming Li
2018-04-16 22:42     ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-17  7:53       ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-04-17  8:10         ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-08 12:32   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] app/testpmd: testpmd support Tx generic tunnel offloads Xueming Li
2018-04-17 14:24     ` Iremonger, Bernard
2018-04-17 15:44       ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-04-08 12:32   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] app/testpmd: add more GRE extension to csum engine Xueming Li
2018-04-16 22:45     ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-17  5:19       ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-04-08 12:32   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] app/testpmd: introduce VXLAN GPE to csum forwarding engine Xueming Li
2018-04-16 22:46     ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-17 13:56       ` Iremonger, Bernard
2018-04-17 14:12         ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-09 14:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/6] net/mlx5: allow max 192B WQE TSO inline header length Xueming Li
2018-01-09 14:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/6] net/mlx5: add SWP PCI parameter for TX common tunnel offloads Xueming Li
2018-01-09 14:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/6] ethdev: introduce " Xueming Li
2018-01-11 18:38   ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-01-16 17:10   ` Olivier Matz
2018-01-16 17:28     ` Xueming(Steven) Li
2018-01-16 19:06       ` Shahaf Shuler
2018-01-22 12:46         ` Olivier Matz
2018-01-22 20:06           ` Shahaf Shuler
2018-01-17  0:50   ` Yongseok Koh
2018-01-09 14:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/6] net/mlx5: support " Xueming Li
2018-01-09 14:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 6/6] app/testpmd: testpmd " Xueming Li
2018-01-16  3:09   ` Lu, Wenzhuo

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=VI1PR05MB1678ABAC0492D2B421AD4830ACFB0@VI1PR05MB1678.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=xuemingl@mellanox.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=yskoh@mellanox.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).