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 B36A03772 for ; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:22:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga002.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.26]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2016 03:22:09 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,557,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="1077147722" Received: from irsmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.99]) by fmsmga002.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2016 03:22:09 -0700 Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.226]) by IRSMSX107.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.10.56]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Fri, 28 Oct 2016 11:22:08 +0100 From: "Kulasek, TomaszX" To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation Thread-Index: AQHSL4ilTMaREL57lkyRUH2a0LRol6C8ViAAgAAOXQCAAAKVgIAABkCAgAATbwCAARfqgIAAEZrg Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 10:22:08 +0000 Message-ID: <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A14F452E3@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1477327917-18564-1-git-send-email-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com> <1499338.8Le0ABsxDG@xps13> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0CD83D@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <2078955.d1Aiqtukxu@xps13> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0CE8E3@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A14F45162@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0CEAEE@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0CEAEE@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation 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 Oct 2016 10:22:11 -0000 Hi Konstantin, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2016 12:16 > To: Kulasek, TomaszX ; Thomas Monjalon > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation >=20 > Hi Tomasz, >=20 > > > > Hi > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 18:24 > > > To: Thomas Monjalon > > > Cc: Kulasek, TomaszX ; dev@dpdk.org > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2016 5:02 PM > > > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin > > > > Cc: Kulasek, TomaszX ; dev@dpdk.org > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation > > > > > > > > 2016-10-27 15:52, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Tomasz, > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a major new function in the API and I still have some > > > comments. > > > > > > > > > > > > 2016-10-26 14:56, Tomasz Kulasek: > > > > > > > --- a/config/common_base > > > > > > > +++ b/config/common_base > > > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_ETHDEV_TX_PREP=3Dy > > > > > > > > > > > > We cannot enable it until it is implemented in every drivers. > > > > > > > > > > Not sure why? > > > > > If tx_pkt_prep =3D=3D NULL, then rte_eth_tx_prep() would just act= as > noop. > > > > > Right now it is not mandatory for the PMD to implement it. > > > > > > > > If it is not implemented, the application must do the preparation > > > > by > > > itself. > > > > From patch 6: > > > > " > > > > Removed pseudo header calculation for udp/tcp/tso packets from > > > > application and used Tx preparation API for packet preparation and > > > > verification. > > > > " > > > > So how does it behave with other drivers? > > > > > > Hmm so it seems that we broke testpmd csumonly mode for non-intel > > > drivers.. > > > My bad, missed that part completely. > > > Yes, then I suppose for now we'll need to support both (with and > > > without) code paths for testpmd. > > > Probably a new fwd mode or just extra parameter for the existing one? > > > Any other suggestions? > > > > > > > I had sent txprep engine in v2 > > (http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/15775/), but I'm opened on the > suggestions. If you like it I can resent it in place of csumonly > modification. >=20 > I still not sure it is worth to have another version of csum... > Can we introduce a new global variable in testpmd and a new command: > testpmd> csum tx_prep > or so? > Looking at current testpmd patch, I suppose the changes will be minimal. > What do you think? > Konstantin >=20 This is not a problem. Tomasz