DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
	Yong Wang <yongwang@vmware.com>,
	"Liu, Jijiang" <jijiang.liu@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 10/10] app/testpmd:test VxLAN Tx checksum offload
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 14:39:28 +0000
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213A40EB@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54635B2B.5040603@6wind.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2014 1:06 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Yong Wang; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Thomas Monjalon
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 10/10] app/testpmd:test VxLAN Tx checksum offload
> 
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> On 11/12/2014 10:55 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >>  From an API perspective, it looks a bit more complex to have to call
> >> dev_prep_tx() before sending the packets if they have been flagged
> >> for offload processing. But I admit I have no other argument. I'll be
> >> happy to have more comments from other people on the list.
> >>
> >> I'm sending a first version of the patchset now as it's ready, it does
> >> not take in account this comment, but I'm open to add it in a v2 if
> >> there is a consensus on this.
> >>
> >> Now, knowing that:
> >> - adding dev_prep_tx() will also concern hw checksum (TCP L4 checksum
> >>    already requires to set the TCP pseudo header checksum), so adding
> >>    this will change the API of an existing feature
> >> - TSO is a new feature expected for 1.8 (which should be out soon)
> >>
> >> Do you think we need to include this for 1.8 or can we postpone your
> >> proposition for after the 1.8 release?
> >
> > I'd say it would be good to have it done together with TSO feature.
> > About changing API: I think existing applications shouldn't be affected.
> > For existing PMDs/TX offloads we don't change  any rules what need to be filled by the app.
> > We just add a new function that can do that for user.
> > If the app fills required manually (as all apps have to do now) it would keep working as expected.
> 
> I agree, this proposition could work without changing the current
> applications.
> 
> > If you feel like it is too much work for 1.8 timeframe -
> > can we at least move fix_tcp_phdr_cksum() out of TX PMD as a temporary measure?
> > Let say create a function  get_ipv4_udptcp_checksum(struct rte_mbuf *m) (in librte_net ?).
> > It will calculate PSD checksum for both TSO and non-TSO case based on given mbuf flags/fields.
> > Then we can update testpmd/csumonly.c to use it.
> 
> I'm not sure having get_ipv4_udptcp_checksum() in librte_net would
> help. The value we have to set in the TCP checksum field depends on the
> PMD (altought only ixgbe is supported now). So, it would require
> another parameter <portid> and a new PMD eth_ops... which looks very
> similar to dev_prep_tx() (except that dev_prep_tx() can be bulked).
> I think a stack will not be able to call get_udptcp_checksum(m ,port)
> because it does not know the physical port at the time the packet is
> built. Moreover, calling a function through a pointer is more efficient
> when bulked. So I think the dev_prep_tx() you initially describe is
> a better answer to the problem.

Yes I understand that it might not be applicable for non-Intel NICs.
Though I thought it is ok as a temporary measure as right now we
support these offloads for Intel NICs only.
Basically my thought was what you proposed as option 3 below.
Why common function in librte_net?
So people don't need to write their own each time.
Plus as I remember all 3 Intel NIC types (ixgbe/igb/i40e) we support have similar 
requirements for what need to be set/calculated for these TX offloads.
So my thought was that having a common function might help to avoid code duplication in future,
If/when will implement dev_prep_tx(). 

> 
> I don't know what is the exact timeframe for 1.8, maybe Thomas can help
> on this? Depending on it, we have several options:
> 
> - implement dev_prep_tx() for 1.8 in the TSO series: this implies that
>    the community agrees on this new API. We need to check that it will
>    be faster in a pipeline model (I think this is obvious) but also that
>    it does not penalize the run-to-completion model: introducing another
>    function dev_prep_tx() can result in duplicated tests in the driver
>    (ex: test the offload flag values).
> 
> - postpone dev_prep_tx() or similar to next version and push the current
>    TSO patchset (including the comments done on the list). It does not
>    modify the current offload API, it provides the TSO feature on ixgbe
>    based on a similar API concept (set the TCP phdr cksum). The drawback
>    is a potential performance loss when using a pipeline model.
> 
> - another option that you may prefer is to bind the API behavior to
>    ixgbe (for 1.8): we can ask the application to set the pseudo-header
>    checksum without the IP len when doing TSO, as required by the ixgbe
>    driver. Then, for next release, we can think about dev_prep_tx(). The
>    drawback of this solution is that we may go back on this choice if the
>    dev_prep_tx() approach is not validated by the community.


My vote would be for option 3 then.

Thanks
Konstantin

> 
> 
> Regards,
> Olivier

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-11-12 14:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-27  2:13 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 00/10] Support VxLAN on Fortville Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 01/10] librte_mbuf:the rte_mbuf structure changes Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 02/10] librte_ether:add the basic data structures of VxLAN Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 03/10] librte_ether:add VxLAN packet identification API Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 04/10] i40e:support VxLAN packet identification in i40e Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 05/10] app/test-pmd:test VxLAN packet identification Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 06/10] librte_ether:add data structures of VxLAN filter Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 07/10] i40e:implement the API of VxLAN filter in librte_pmd_i40e Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 08/10] app/testpmd:test VxLAN packet filter Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 09/10] i40e:support VxLAN Tx checksum offload Jijiang Liu
2014-10-27  2:13 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 10/10] app/testpmd:test " Jijiang Liu
2014-11-04  8:19   ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-05  6:02     ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-05 10:28       ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-06 11:24         ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-06 13:08           ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-06 14:27             ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-07  0:43         ` Yong Wang
2014-11-07 17:16           ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-10 11:39             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-11-10 15:57               ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-12  9:55                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-11-12 13:05                   ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-12 13:40                     ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-11-12 23:14                       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-11-12 14:39                     ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2014-11-12 14:56                       ` Olivier MATZ
     [not found]             ` <D0868B54.24DBB%yongwang@vmware.com>
2014-11-11  0:07               ` [dpdk-dev] FW: " Yong Wang
2014-11-10  6:03         ` [dpdk-dev] " Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-10 16:17           ` Olivier MATZ
     [not found]             ` <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D8F7A7@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
2014-11-12 17:26               ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-11-13  5:35                 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-13  5:39                   ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-13  6:51                 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-13  9:10                   ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-11-14  8:15                     ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-14  9:09                       ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-17  6:52                         ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-17 11:21                           ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-20  7:28                             ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-11-20 16:36                               ` Olivier MATZ
2014-11-21  5:40                                 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-10-27  2:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 00/10] Support VxLAN on Fortville Liu, Yong
2014-10-27  2:41 ` Zhang, Helin
2014-10-27 13:46   ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-27 14:34     ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-10-27 15:15       ` Thomas Monjalon

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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213A40EB@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jijiang.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=yongwang@vmware.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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git