From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A57B1594F for ; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 12:14:47 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Nov 2014 03:18:09 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,862,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="415942659" Received: from pgsmsx101.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.78]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 13 Nov 2014 03:15:41 -0800 Received: from shsmsx151.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.50) by PGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.78) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 19:24:39 +0800 Received: from shsmsx101.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.110]) by SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.86]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 19:24:38 +0800 From: "Liu, Jijiang" To: Thomas Monjalon , "Richardson, Bruce" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/9] librte_mbuf:the rte_mbuf structure changes Thread-Index: AQHP/nxeFH7scgFPzEikyx13L/39K5xd3XOA///eAICAAKnvQA== Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 11:24:38 +0000 Message-ID: <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D9A425@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1413881168-20239-1-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> <2835075.ZIuhO63ZWU@xps13> <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D97183@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <6349776.LhCYQBaBlF@xps13> In-Reply-To: <6349776.LhCYQBaBlF@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/9] librte_mbuf:the rte_mbuf structure changes 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: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 11:14:49 -0000 Hi,=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 4:53 PM > To: Liu, Jijiang > Cc: Zhang, Helin; dev@dpdk.org; Richardson, Bruce > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/9] librte_mbuf:the rte_mbuf structure > changes >=20 > 2014-11-13 03:17, Liu, Jijiang: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > 2014-10-23 02:23, Zhang, Helin: > > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas > > > > Monjalon > > > > > 2014-10-21 14:14, Liu, Jijiang: > > > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > > > > > 2014-10-21 16:46, Jijiang Liu: > > > > > > > > + uint16_t packet_type; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why not name it "l2_type"? > > > > > > > > 'packet_type' is for storing the hardware identified packet type > > > > upon different layers of protocols (l2, l3, l4, ...). > > > > It is quite useful for user application or middle layer software > > > > stacks, it can know what the packet type is without checking the > > > > packet too > > > much by software. > > > > Actually ixgbe already has packet types (less than 10), which is > > > > transcoded into > > > 'ol_flags'. > > > > For i40e, the packet type can represent about 256 types of packet, > > > > 'ol_flags' does not have enough bits for it anymore. So put the > > > > i40e packet types > > > into mbuf would be better. > > > > Also this field can be used for NON-Intel NICs, I think there must > > > > be the similar concepts of other NICs. And 16 bits 'packet_type' > > > > has severl > > > reserved bits for future and NON-Intel NICs. > > > > > > Thanks Helin, that's the best description of packet_type I've seen so= far. > > > It's not so clear in the commit log: > > > http://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk/commit/?id=3D73b7d59cf4f6faf > > > > > > > > > In datasheet, this term is called packet type(s). > > > > > > > > > > That's exactly the point I want you really understand! > > > > > This is a field in generic mbuf structure, so your datasheet has = no value > here. > > > > > > > > > > > Personally , I think packet type is more clear what meaning of= this field > is . > > > > > > > > > > You cannot add an API field without knowing what will be its gene= ric > meaning. > > > > > Please think about it and describe its scope. > > > > > > I integrated this patch with the VXLAN patchset in the hope that > > > you'll improve the situation afterwards. > > > This is the answer you recently gave to Olivier: > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-November/007599.html > > > " > > > Regarding adding a packet_type in mbuf, we ever had a lot of > > > discussions as follows: > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-October/007027.html > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-September/005240.html > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-September/005241.html > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-September/005274.html > > > " > > > > > > To sum up the situation: > > > - We don't know what are the possible values of packet_type > > > - It's only filled by i40e, while other drivers use ol_flags > > > - There is no special value "unknown" which should be set by drivers > > > not supporting this feature. > > > - Its only usage is to print a decimal value in > > > app/test-pmd/rxonly.c > > > > > > It's now clear that nobody cares about this part of the API. > > > So I'm going to remove packet_type from mbuf. > > > I don't want to keep something that we don't know how to use, that > > > is not consistent across drivers, and that overlap another API part (= ol_flags). > > > > The packet type in 40e is very important for user, using packet type > > can help to speed up packet analysis/identification in their > > application, especially tunneling packet format. > > Now I'm working on implementing packet type definition in rte_ethdev.h > > file and translation table in i40e, which is almost done. > > The packet type definition in in rte_ethdev.h file like below. > > /* > > * Ethernet packet type > > */ > > enum rte_eth_ptype { > > /* undefined packet type, means HW can't recognise it */ > > RTE_PTYPE_UNDEF =3D 0, > > ... > > > > /* IPv4 --> GRE/Teredo/VXLAN --> MAC --> IPv4 */ > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv4FRAG_PAY3, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv4_PAY3, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv4_UDP_PAY4, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv4_TCP_PAY4, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv4_SCTP_PAY4, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv4_ICMP_PAY4, > > > > /* IPv4 --> GRE/Teredo/VXLAN --> MAC --> IPv6 */ > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv6FRAG_PAY3 > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv6_PAY3, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv6_UDP_PAY4, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv6_TCP_PAY4, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv6_SCTP_PAY4, > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MAC_IPv6_ICMP_PAY4, > > > > /* IPv4 --> GRE/Teredo/VXLAN --> MAC/VLAN */ > > RTE_PTYPE_IPv4_GRENAT_MACVLAN_PAY3, > > ... > > } >=20 > OK, it seems well abstracted. > I think the last part of these names (PAY3/PAY4) is useless. >=20 > When this patch for API and i40e will be ready? > I'd prefer fixing the API instead of removing it. If needed, next week, I can send a patch for this. > > Yes, we don't use packet type in many places now, which doesn't mean > > we don't use it in the future (when supporting another tunneling packe= t). > > > > It is ok for me if you want to remove the packet_type filed in mbuf, > > but we will send a separate patch set for introducing packet type in > > the future, which includes 1g/10/40g PMD changes. >=20 > When the patches for igb/ixgbe will be ready? We need some time to investigate this for igb/ixgbe, probably some example = codes and test application codes need to changed.=20 You can assume that it cannot be done in DPDK1.8. So here are my three suggestions: 1. keep packet_type in mbuf and wait for all the igb/ixgb/i40e changes done= in DPDK2.0. Now, I don't send a separate patch set for it.=20 2. keep packet_type in mbuf, I just send i40e patch set for this in DPDK1.= 8. In DPDK2.0, we will send a patch set for igb/ixgbe. 3. It can be removed now, and we will send a separate patch set for introd= ucing packet type in the future. > Thanks > -- > Thomas