From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga11.intel.com (mga11.intel.com [192.55.52.93]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBA7D58E8 for ; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 11:40:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2014 02:40:08 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,862,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="422615493" Received: from irsmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.99]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Nov 2014 02:30:11 -0800 Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.144]) by IRSMSX107.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.10.115]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:40:07 +0000 From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" To: "Liu, Jijiang" , Olivier MATZ , "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] mbuf:add three TX offload flags and change three fields Thread-Index: AQHQCu8HtybaEe97F0+AWT7gU9Fz85x1140AgAAAoHA= Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:40:06 +0000 Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213BB218@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1417107801-9544-1-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> <1417107801-9544-2-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> <54784232.8030707@6wind.com> <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D9F2B9@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01D9F2B9@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] mbuf:add three TX offload flags and change three fields 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, 28 Nov 2014 10:40:10 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Liu, Jijiang > Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 10:33 AM > To: Olivier MATZ; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] mbuf:add three TX offload flags an= d change three fields >=20 > Hi Olivier, >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 28, 2014 5:37 PM > > To: Liu, Jijiang; dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] mbuf:add three TX offload flags = and > > change three fields > > > > Hi Jijiang, > > > > On 11/27/2014 06:03 PM, Jijiang Liu wrote: > > > /** Tell the NIC it's an IPv4 packet. Required for L4 checksum offlo= ad or TSO. > > */ > > > #define PKT_TX_IPV4 PKT_RX_IPV4_HDR > > > > > > /** Tell the NIC it's an IPv6 packet. Required for L4 checksum offlo= ad or TSO. > > */ > > > #define PKT_TX_IPV6 PKT_RX_IPV6_HDR > > > > The description still does not match what we discussed. Either we have > > PKT_TX_IPV4 meaning "packet is IPv4 without requiring IP cksum offload"= , or > > "packet is IPv4". I prefer the second one, but whatever the choice is, = the > > comments must be coherent. > > > I agree. > "packet is IPv4" is ok for me, too. > The comment "Required for L4 checksum offload or TSO" is not added by me,= I should have thought you added it during developing > TSO. > Anyway, we came to an agreement for PKT_TX_IPV6/4 meaning, I will change= the two flags comments. >=20 >=20 Well, I still prefer them to be mutually exclusive. Even better, if we can squeeze these 3 flags into 2 bits. Would save us 2 bits, plus might be handy, as in the PMD you can do: switch (ol_flags & TX_L3_MASK) { case TX_IPV4: ... break; case TX_IPV6: ... break; case TX_IP_CKSUM: ... break; } For the upper layer, I think there would be no big difference, what ways we= will choose. Konstantin =20