From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D9741B300 for ; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 09:36:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25CFC20F9A; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 03:36:30 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 26 Jan 2018 03:36:30 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=rQpDjCMLP4NjfcUs+8PAd20Hzz LHiDj0+I6KWgrYPqI=; b=D6sUJOcAX6QlsPc8sN8PqQ1yXiWVP49D+RvvhFER1+ rayoCiuSQa8Fc2UcD882gcmwYwsjndG33kBjB5EegUW7GqUJbxC8WAEF/YAk0x2L N4yjhYDvjJ7tIkycZu7X5/uIwdAR7zqKWjvZfozohv+bDq3VRfeAmh6zu9jNN0zp k= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=rQpDjC MLP4NjfcUs+8PAd20HzzLHiDj0+I6KWgrYPqI=; b=c+TyJz6oNF8ZMmJvPVPCZd 0ly/+m+Y+vaBVqDNV3neUWsKT8PhulVIejnl0jEzpdlnOmrFYj5K1kyatHO3emjm dEeyp3rM/vuR/kimTl6J3Kr9OwzTM+Yz7fI8KmDt0XygiwPrsJTY4K/UNPT6OKus R5Lb7br+PtJuSRyuQZ2IKu/S9G2qjnJ7YKjdVTHjel6ksmFvrEQ/VUqaILBE+l0b U3LFqoXAZUZs1WahmHKlzOa6GlEyPx/tUdKU7z7A4ZSHfnoZBg0Rde2tWYfCYFNO 5E8b1Dtj5fGzkHCagiAWCFV7cSkS91cHhlInVj2ZZcydqgDgHBPx4DQI1j0CjwhQ == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id BBF1A240F8; Fri, 26 Jan 2018 03:36:29 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Lu, Wenzhuo" Cc: Moti Haimovsky , dev@dpdk.org, "shahafs@mellanox.com" , "Yigit, Ferruh" Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 09:35:47 +0100 Message-ID: <4518250.zEhSojeenl@xps> In-Reply-To: <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093B721D05@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1516695081-178919-1-git-send-email-motih@mellanox.com> <6183373.cbWzoGE1aT@xps> <6A0DE07E22DDAD4C9103DF62FEBC09093B721D05@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: do not enable Rx offloads by default X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 08:36:33 -0000 26/01/2018 09:06, Lu, Wenzhuo: > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 26/01/2018 08:30, Lu, Wenzhuo: > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > > 25/01/2018 02:11, Lu, Wenzhuo: > > > > > > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c > > > > > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c > > > > > > @@ -305,9 +305,7 @@ struct fwd_engine * fwd_engines[] = { > > > > > > */ > > > > > > struct rte_eth_rxmode rx_mode = { > > > > > > .max_rx_pkt_len = ETHER_MAX_LEN, /**< Default maximum > > frame > > > > > > length. */ > > > > > > - .offloads = (DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_FILTER | > > > > > > - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_STRIP | > > > > > > - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CRC_STRIP), > > > > > > + .offloads = 0, > > > > > > > > > > Change the default behavior may trigger other problems. I think TX > > > > > offload > > > > could be a good reference. Get the capability and check what's > > > > supported first, then ignore the not supported functions with > > > > printing a warning but not block anything... > > > > > > > > I agree that we should check the capabilities before requesting an offload. > > > > But I disagree on another point: we should not enable an offload if > > > > the user did not request it explicitly. It makes things unclear. > > > > This is a testing tool, it should be close to the ethdev API behavior. > > > > > > > > Why these offload flags are silently enabled? > > > > > > I don't think it's silently. It's a global configuration. In this case, testpmd is > > the user, it does request it explicitly. If it's not so explicit, maybe we can > > consider moving all the configuration to a specific configure file. > > > Talking about why it's enabled by default. Hard to figure out the history. > > To my opinion, the original designer wants to simulate the common case. > > > > Please do not justify a design mistake by history. > > > > This is a test tool, so we don't care about the common case. > > A test tool should not try to guess the best configuration. > > Only the user should decide the configuration to apply, and the default > > should be empty, as the API is. > > I see the divergence. You think testpmd is a tool, so it should be white paper as the tool users may suppose it is. > I think testpmd is an example to let the APP developers know how to use DPDK. So any pre-configuration is acceptable. Ah ah ah :) No Examples are in examples/ directory.