From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from rere.qmqm.pl (rere.qmqm.pl [84.10.57.10]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DD91106A for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 15:26:55 +0100 (CET) Received: by rere.qmqm.pl (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E55886082; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 15:26:54 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 15:26:54 +0100 From: Michal Miroslaw To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Message-ID: <20161213142654.me3p5gl7muji3sei@rere.qmqm.pl> References: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E6E4C@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E6E4C@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-07-23) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 06/13] null: fake PMD capabilities X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:26:55 -0000 On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:48:32AM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Michal Miroslaw > > Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2016 1:08 AM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 06/13] null: fake PMD capabilities > > > > From: Paweł Małachowski > > > > Thanks to that change we can use Null PMD for testing purposes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michał Mirosław > > --- > > drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c | 13 ++++++++++++- > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c > > index 836d982..f32ba2a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c > > @@ -284,6 +284,9 @@ eth_tx_queue_setup(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, uint16_t tx_queue_id, > > return 0; > > } > > > > +static void > > +eth_dev_void_ok(struct rte_eth_dev *dev __rte_unused) { return; } > > + > > > > static void > > eth_dev_info(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > @@ -304,6 +307,9 @@ eth_dev_info(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > > dev_info->pci_dev = NULL; > > dev_info->reta_size = internals->reta_size; > > dev_info->flow_type_rss_offloads = internals->flow_type_rss_offloads; > > + /* We hereby declare we can RX-offload VLAN-s out of thin air and update checksums and VLANs before sinking packets in > > /dev/null */ > > + dev_info->rx_offload_capa = DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_STRIP; > > + dev_info->tx_offload_capa = DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_INSERT | DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM; > > Hmm, how could it be supported if all that null PMD does on TX - just free the packets? > Same question for RX. You could imagine, that before dropping the packet you insert the tag and calculate the checksum. The observed effect will be the same. On RX this always indicates lack of VLAN tag. So whether the offload is enabled or not it doesn't matter. Best Regards, Michał Mirosław