DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	"shahafs@mellanox.com" <shahafs@mellanox.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples: remove Rx checksum offload
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 14:12:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258DF51F775@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180730111823.GA30059@jerin>

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> > Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2018 11:00:02 +0000
> > From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, Jerin Jacob
> >  <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
> > CC: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Yigit, Ferruh"
> >  <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "shahafs@mellanox.com" <shahafs@mellanox.com>
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples: remove Rx checksum offload
> >
> > External Email
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net]
> > > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2018 10:51 AM
> > > To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; shahafs@mellanox.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] examples: remove Rx checksum offload
> > >
> > > 30/07/2018 11:35, Jerin Jacob:
> > > > From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As of now, application does not check PKT_RX_*_CKSUM_* flags per
> > > > > > packet, so it does not matter DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CHECKSUM enabled or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Removing DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CHECKSUM offload so that driver can save a few
> > > > > > cycles if possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I'd move in other direction: keep RX checksum offload and add
> > > > > checks inside sample apps to handle (drop) packets with invalid checksum.
> > > >
> > > > OK. Till someones add the DROP logic in application, Can we take
> > > > this patch? Because there is no point in enabling DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CHECKSUM
> > > > without DROP or any meaning full action in application.
> >
> > Probably, but at least it gives users a right estimation how long the proper
> > RX/TX routine would take.
> 
> For estimation, application can add any flag they want in local setup.
> It does not need to be upstream with out feature complete.
> 
> > From other side what the point to disable these flags now, if we know that
> 
> At least nicvf Rx routines are crafted based DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CHECKSUM
> flags. If driver Rx routine crafted such case it will be useful.
> 
> > we are doing wrong thing and will have to re-enable them again in future?
> 
> But it is not correct now either. Right?

Yes, right now invalid cksum information is simply ignored.
As you pointed - some PMD select RX routine based on checksum offload flags.
Yes, removing these flags might produce better performance numbers.
But from my perspective - it would be an artificial and temporary improvement,
as for l3fwd like apps we'll need to revert it back and add code to drop invalid packets.
Konstantin

> 
> >
> > >
> > > If there is no patch sent to use this offload on August 1st,
> > > then I will apply this patch to remove the offload request.
> > >
> >
> > Isn't it too late to do such things right now?
> > We are in RC3 stage and doesn't look like a critical issue.
> 
> Yes. We can add it when have we proper fix. Currently, it signaling a wrong
> interpretation to application.
> 
> 
> > Konstantin
> >
> >

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-30 14:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-29 12:44 Jerin Jacob
2018-07-30  9:27 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-07-30  9:35   ` Jerin Jacob
2018-07-30  9:50     ` Shahaf Shuler
2018-07-30  9:50     ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-07-30 11:00       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-07-30 11:18         ` Jerin Jacob
2018-07-30 14:12           ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2018-07-30 14:40             ` Jerin Jacob
2018-07-30 15:30               ` Andrew Rybchenko
2018-08-23 12:04                 ` Ferruh Yigit

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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258DF51F775@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /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).