From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: "Liu, Jijiang" <jijiang.liu@intel.com>,
'Olivier MATZ' <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum forwarding engine
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 12:07:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213D34AE@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01DA789E@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liu, Jijiang
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 11:39 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; 'Olivier MATZ'
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum forwarding engine
>
> Hi Konstantin,
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2015 5:59 PM
> > To: Liu, Jijiang; 'Olivier MATZ'
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> > csum forwarding engine
> >
> > Hi Frank,
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Liu, Jijiang
> > > Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 2:04 AM
> > > To: 'Olivier MATZ'
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> > > csum forwarding engine
> > >
> > > Hi Olivier,
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> > > > Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 12:33 AM
> > > > To: Liu, Jijiang
> > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command
> > > > and csum forwarding engine
> > > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > On 12/12/2014 04:48 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
> > > > > The 'hw/sw' option is used to set/clear the flag of enabling TX
> > > > > tunneling packet
> > > > checksum hardware offload in testpmd application.
> > > >
> > > > This is not clear at all.
> > > > In your command, there is (hw|sw|none).
> > > > Are you talking about inner or outer?
> > > > Is this command useful for any kind of packet?
> > > > How does it combine with "tx_checksum set outer-ip (hw|sw)"?
> > > >
> > >
> > > I rethink these TX checksum commands in this patch set and agree with
> > > you that we should make some changes for having clear meaning for them.
> > >
> > > There are 3 commands in patch set as follows, 1. tx_checksum set
> > > tunnel (hw|sw|none) (port-id)
> > >
> > > Now I also think the command 1 may confuse user, they probably don't
> > > understand why we need 'hw' or 'sw' option and when to use the two
> > > option, so I will replace the command with 'tx_checksum set hw-tunnel-mode
> > (on|off) (port-id)' command.
> >
> > I am a bit confused here, could you explain what would be a behaviour for 'on' and
> > 'off'?
> > Konstantin
>
> I have explained the behaviour for 'on' and'off' below,
>
> The command 'tx_checksum set hw-tunnel-mode (on|off) (port-id)' is
> used to set/clear TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_TUNNEL_CKSUM flag.
>
> Actually, the PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT offload flag will be set if the
> testpmd flag is set, which means to tell HW treat that transmit packet as a tunneling packet to do checksum offload
> When 'on' is set, which is able to meet Method B.1 and method C.
>
> When 'off' is set, the TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_TUNNEL_CKSUM is not needed
> to set, so the PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT offload flag is not needed to set, then HW treat that transmit packet as a non-tunneling
> packet. It is able to meet Method B.2.
>
> Is the explanation not clear?
Ok, and how I can set method A (testpmd treat all packets as non-tunnelling and never look beyond outer L4 header) then?
Konstantin
>
> >
> > >
> > > 2. tx_checksum set outer-ip (hw|sw) (port-id) 3. tx_checksum set
> > > (ip|udp|tcp|sctp) (hw|sw) (port-id)
> > >
> > > The command 2 will be merged into command 3, the new command is '
> > > tx_checksum set (outer-ip|ip|udp|tcp|sctp) (hw|sw) (port- id)'.
> > >
> > > These most of the cases in
> > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-December/009213.html will be
> > > covered by using the two commands
> > >
> > > The command 'tx_checksum set hw-tunnel-mode (on|off) (port-id)' is
> > > used to set/clear TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_TUNNEL_CKSUM flag.
> > > Actually, the PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT offload flag will be set if the
> > > testpmd flag is set, which tell driver/HW treat that transmit packet as a
> > tunneling packet.
> > >
> > > When 'on' is set, which is able to meet Method B.1 and method C.
> > >
> > > When 'off' is set, the TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_TUNNEL_CKSUM is not needed
> > > to set, so the PKT_TX_UDP_TUNNEL_PKT offload flag is not needed to set, then
> > HW treat that transmit packet as a non-tunneling packet. It is able to meet
> > Method B.2.
> > >
> > > As to case A, I think it is not mandatory to cover it in csum fwd engine for
> > tunneling packet.
> > >
> > > Is the above description clear for you?
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Olivier
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-07 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-10 1:03 Jijiang Liu
2014-12-10 1:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] librte_ether:add outer IP offload capability flag Jijiang Liu
2014-12-11 10:33 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-10 1:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] i40e:support outer IPv4 checksum capability Jijiang Liu
2014-12-11 10:34 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-10 1:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] app/testpmd:change tx_checksum command and csum forwarding engine Jijiang Liu
2014-12-11 10:52 ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-12 4:06 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-12-11 10:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum " Olivier MATZ
2014-12-12 3:48 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-12-12 16:33 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-07 2:03 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-07 9:59 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-07 11:39 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-07 12:07 ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2015-01-08 8:51 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-08 10:54 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-09 10:45 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-12 3:41 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-12 11:43 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-13 3:04 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-13 9:55 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-14 3:01 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-15 13:31 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-16 17:27 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-19 13:04 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-19 14:38 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-20 1:12 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-20 12:39 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-20 15:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-01-20 17:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-01-20 17:23 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-20 18:15 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-21 3:12 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-21 15:25 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-21 16:28 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-21 17:13 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-26 4:13 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-26 6:02 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-26 14:07 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-26 14:15 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-27 8:34 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-27 15:26 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-21 19:44 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-01-22 1:40 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-21 8:01 ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-21 9:10 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-21 11:52 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-07 13:06 ` Qiu, Michael
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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213D34AE@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jijiang.liu@intel.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).