From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0D637E7B for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 09:33:26 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id h11so3356271wiw.0 for ; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 00:41:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=xMOXMShQGf0IB16oG5bWVDEN9CGAKIcP5GbANvs5MAg=; b=czXrMFUJ/yOaoxyg7cdWy1ti+Zlsi06EcwCXcPxdajDcS4AZ82ADlwrgJ9Tpg4XbZq JJGfd89IoqnGZneMpmZcjxFE/OALGXZhrvzrYNsO3TsHfzqil8x3xNNfZ5l7j387E8F+ i5gLrp9aw/SSIQLiKaqFJdc1oTcTtxBekOogReGykgj+r7aQ3n46JJ3JCLVRGqwi9iCD JV+7wjlGwKuvRKCvDTVFaDKDJeWGNE9h2G2SmIqPfIEUsq2Qjc1tmWbvJeDP1v1vQbf5 DxmVGxOXenvaXvjvMd4vd8tkE5blO75NYfTJTrxczCp84m1i75Mdgt5jM66xKHoObsF+ ECbA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmOI4V76PTG1D53X/Ht1alRCfX70GRFfM0u4d7v4JVZ/V3QZsQJb6bTbdMX6T1bmmPFB5Bd X-Received: by 10.180.76.68 with SMTP id i4mr26450716wiw.56.1413531683897; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 00:41:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (136-92-190-109.dsl.ovh.fr. [109.190.92.136]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ce1sm698364wjc.2.2014.10.17.00.41.22 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 17 Oct 2014 00:41:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Liu, Jijiang" Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 09:41:08 +0200 Message-ID: <1644288.qmWF3zu5IN@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.1 (Linux/3.16.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D77681@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1413006935-22535-1-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> <2959182.8PakPvQ7cT@xps13> <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D77681@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/8]app/test-pmd:test VxLAN packet identification X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 07:33:27 -0000 2014-10-17 05:23, Liu, Jijiang: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > 2014-10-11 13:55, Jijiang Liu: > > > - "tx_checksum set mask (port_id)\n" > > > + "tx_checksum set (mask) (port_id)\n" > > > " Enable hardware insertion of checksum offload > > with" > > > - " the 4-bit mask, 0~0xf, in packets sent on a port.\n" > > > + " the 8-bit mask, 0~0xff, in packets sent on a port.\n" > > > " bit 0 - insert ip checksum offload if set\n" > > > " bit 1 - insert udp checksum offload if set\n" > > > " bit 2 - insert tcp checksum offload if set\n" > > > " bit 3 - insert sctp checksum offload if set\n" > > > + " bit 4 - insert inner ip checksum offload if > > set\n" > > > + " bit 5 - insert inner udp checksum offload if > > set\n" > > > + " bit 6 - insert inner tcp checksum offload if > > set\n" > > > + " bit 7 - insert inner sctp checksum offload if > > set\n" > > > " Please check the NIC datasheet for HW > > limits.\n\n" > > [...] > > > .help_str = "enable hardware insertion of L3/L4checksum with a > > given " > > > - "mask in packets sent on a port, the bit mapping is given as, Bit 0 for > > ip" > > > - "Bit 1 for UDP, Bit 2 for TCP, Bit 3 for SCTP", > > > + "mask in packets sent on a port, the bit mapping is given as, Bit 0 for > > ip " > > > + "Bit 1 for UDP, Bit 2 for TCP, Bit 3 for SCTP, Bit 4 for inner ip " > > > + "Bit 5 for inner UDP, Bit 6 for inner TCP, Bit 7 for inner SCTP", > > > .tokens = { > > > (void *)&cmd_tx_cksum_set_tx_cksum, > > > (void *)&cmd_tx_cksum_set_set, > > > > How is it related to VXLAN? > > I may have missed something. But if not, I note the name of the reviewers ;) > > Yes, it is related to VxLAN Tx Checksum test, I will put the changes to test VxLAN Tx checksum patch. Yes it must be moved in the patch related to checksum test. -- Thomas