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 ED0D66CC7 for ; Wed, 7 Sep 2016 05:25:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Sep 2016 20:25:19 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,294,1470726000"; d="scan'208";a="1052381760" Received: from yliu-dev.sh.intel.com (HELO yliu-dev) ([10.239.67.162]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 06 Sep 2016 20:25:18 -0700 Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 11:25:47 +0800 From: Yuanhan Liu To: Maxime Coquelin Cc: souvikdey33 , stephen@networkplumber.org, huawei.xie@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org Message-ID: <20160907032547.GG23158@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> References: <20160829230240.20164-1-sodey@sonusnet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] add mtu set in virtio 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: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 03:25:20 -0000 On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 09:57:39AM +0200, Maxime Coquelin wrote: > Hi Souvik, > > On 08/30/2016 01:02 AM, souvikdey33 wrote: > >Signed-off-by: Souvik Dey > > > >Fixes: 1fb8e8896ca8 ("Signed-off-by: Souvik Dey ") > >Reviewed-by: Stephen Hemminger > > > >Virtio interfaces should also support setting of mtu, as in case of cloud > >it is expected to have the consistent mtu across the infrastructure that > >the dhcp server sends and not hardcoded to 1500(default). > >--- > > drivers/net/virtio/virtio_ethdev.c | 12 ++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) > > FYI, there are some on-going changes in the VIRTIO specification > so that the VHOST interface exposes its MTU to its VIRTIO peer. > It may also be used as an alternative of what you patch achieves. > > I am working on its implementation in Qemu/DPDK, our goal being to > reduce performance drops for small packets with Rx mergeable buffers > feature enabled. Mind to educate me a bit on how that works? --yliu