From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
"Yang, SteveX" <stevex.yang@intel.com>,
"Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Zhao1, Wei" <wei.zhao1@intel.com>,
"Guo, Jia" <jia.guo@intel.com>,
"Yang, Qiming" <qiming.yang@intel.com>,
"Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
"Xing, Beilei" <beilei.xing@intel.com>,
"Stokes, Ian" <ian.stokes@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/ice: fix max mtu size packets with vlan tag cannot be received by default
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 14:07:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <483bd509-82b9-9724-d28c-c517ef091e0c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BYAPR11MB330105FA146CB24BA6791CC39A1E0@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
On 10/19/2020 11:49 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:38 PM
>>> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Yang, SteveX
>>> <stevex.yang@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
>>> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>> Cc: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; Guo, Jia <jia.guo@intel.com>; Yang,
>>> Qiming <qiming.yang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>;
>>> Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>; Stokes, Ian <ian.stokes@intel.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/ice: fix max mtu size packets
>>> with vlan tag cannot be received by default
>>>
>>> On 9/30/2020 3:32 AM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Yang, SteveX <stevex.yang@intel.com>
>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 9:32 AM
>>>>> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
>>>>> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>>>> Cc: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; Guo, Jia <jia.guo@intel.com>;
>>>>> Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
>>>>> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>
>>>>> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 3/5] net/ice: fix max mtu size packets with
>>>>> vlan tag cannot be received by default
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 8:35 AM
>>>>>> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Yang,
>>> SteveX
>>>>>> <stevex.yang@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>>>>> Cc: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; Guo, Jia <jia.guo@intel.com>;
>>>>>> Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
>>>>>> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>
>>>>>> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 3/5] net/ice: fix max mtu size packets with
>>>>>> vlan tag cannot be received by default
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2020 7:02 AM
>>>>>>> To: Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Yang, SteveX
>>>>>>> <stevex.yang@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>>>>>> Cc: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; Guo, Jia <jia.guo@intel.com>;
>>>>>>> Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
>>>>>>> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>
>>>>>>> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 3/5] net/ice: fix max mtu size packets with
>>>>>>> vlan tag cannot be received by default
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>>> From: Yang, SteveX <stevex.yang@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, September 28, 2020 2:56 PM
>>>>>>>>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>>>>>>>>> Cc: Zhao1, Wei <wei.zhao1@intel.com>; Guo, Jia
>>>>>>>>> <jia.guo@intel.com>; Yang, Qiming <qiming.yang@intel.com>;
>>> Zhang,
>>>>>>>>> Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
>>>>>>>>> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Xing, Beilei <beilei.xing@intel.com>;
>>>>>>>>> Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Yang,
>>> SteveX
>>>>>>>>> <stevex.yang@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>> Subject: [PATCH v4 3/5] net/ice: fix max mtu size packets with
>>>>>>>>> vlan tag cannot be received by default
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> testpmd will initialize default max packet length to 1518 which
>>>>>>>>> doesn't include vlan tag size in ether overheader. Once, send the
>>>>>>>>> max mtu length packet with vlan tag, the max packet length will
>>>>>>>>> exceed 1518 that will cause packets dropped directly from NIC hw
>>>>> side.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ice can support dual vlan tags that need more 8 bytes for max
>>>>>>>>> packet size, so, configures the correct max packet size in
>>>>>>>>> dev_config
>>>>>> ops.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Fixes: 50cc9d2a6e9d ("net/ice: fix max frame size")
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: SteveX Yang <stevex.yang@intel.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>> drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c | 11 +++++++++++
>>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
>>>>>>>>> b/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c index
>>>>>>>>> cfd357b05..6b7098444 100644
>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ice/ice_ethdev.c
>>>>>>>>> @@ -3146,6 +3146,7 @@ ice_dev_configure(struct rte_eth_dev
>>> *dev)
>>>>>>>>> struct ice_adapter *ad =
>>>>>>>>> ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_ADAPTER(dev->data->dev_private);
>>>>>>>>> struct ice_pf *pf =
>>>>>>>>> ICE_DEV_PRIVATE_TO_PF(dev->data->dev_private);
>>>>>>>>> +uint32_t frame_size = dev->data->mtu + ICE_ETH_OVERHEAD;
>>>>>>>>> int ret;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> /* Initialize to TRUE. If any of Rx queues doesn't meet the @@
>>>>>>>>> -3157,6
>>>>>>>>> +3158,16 @@ ice_dev_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
>>>>>>>>> if (dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.mq_mode &
>>> ETH_MQ_RX_RSS_FLAG)
>>>>>>>>> dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads |=
>>>>>> DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH;
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +/**
>>>>>>>>> + * Considering QinQ packet, max frame size should be equal or
>>>>>>>>> + * larger than total size of MTU and Ether overhead.
>>>>>>>>> + */
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +if (frame_size > dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len) {
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why we need this check?
>>>>>>>> Can we just call ice_mtu_set directly
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that without that check we can silently overwrite provided
>>>>>>> by user dev_conf.rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len value.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OK, I see
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But still have one question
>>>>>> dev->data->mtu is initialized to 1518 as default , but if
>>>>>> dev->data->application set
>>>>>> dev_conf.rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len = 1000 in dev_configure.
>>>>>> does that mean we will still will set mtu to 1518, is this expected?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> max_rx_pkt_len should be larger than mtu at least, so we should raise
>>>>> the max_rx_pkt_len (e.g.:1518) to hold expected mtu value (e.g.: 1500).
>>>>
>>>> Ok, this describe the problem more general and better to replace exist
>>> code comment and commit log for easy understanding.
>>>> Please send a new version for reword
>>>>
>>>
>>> I didn't really get this set.
>>>
>>> Application explicitly sets 'max_rx_pkt_len' to '1518', and a frame bigger than
>>> this size is dropped.
>>
>> Sure, it is normal case for dropping oversize data.
>>
>>> Isn't this what should be, why we are trying to overwrite user configuration
>>> in PMD to prevent this?
>>>
>>
>> But it is a confliction that application/user sets mtu & max_rx_pkt_len at the same time.
>> This fix will make a decision when confliction occurred.
>> MTU value will come from user operation (e.g.: port config mtu 0 1500) directly,
>> so, the max_rx_pkt_len will resize itself to adapt expected MTU value if its size is smaller than MTU + Ether overhead.
>>
>>> During eth_dev allocation, mtu set to default '1500', by ethdev layer.
>>> And testpmd sets 'max_rx_pkt_len' by default to '1518'.
>>> I think Qi's concern above is valid, what is user set 'max_rx_pkt_len' to '1000'
>>> and mean it? PMD will not honor the user config.
>>
>> I'm not sure when set 'mtu' to '1500' and 'max_rx_pkt_len' to '1000', what's the behavior expected?
>> If still keep the 'max_rx_pkt_len' value, that means the larger 'mtu' will be invalid.
>>
>>>
>>> Why not simply increase the default 'max_rx_pkt_len' in testpmd?
>>>
>> The default 'max_rx_pkt_len' has been initialized to generical value (1518) and default 'mtu' is '1500' in testpmd,
>> But it isn't suitable to those NIC drivers which Ether overhead is larger than 18. (e.g.: ice, i40e) if 'mtu' value is preferable.
>>
>>> And I guess even better what we need is to tell to the application what the
>>> frame overhead PMD accepts.
>>> So the application can set proper 'max_rx_pkt_len' value per port for a
>>> given/requested MTU value.
>>> @Ian, cc'ed, was complaining almost same thing years ago, these PMD
>>> overhead macros and 'max_mtu'/'min_mtu' added because of that, perhaps
>>> he has a solution now?
>
> From my perspective the main problem here:
> We have 2 different variables for nearly the same thing:
> rte_eth_dev_data.mtu and rte_eth_dev_data.dev_conf.max_rx_pkt_len.
> and 2 different API to update them: dev_mtu_set() and dev_configure().
According API 'max_rx_pkt_len' is 'Only used if JUMBO_FRAME enabled'
Although not sure that is practically what is done for all drivers.
> And inside majority of Intel PMDs we don't keep these 2 variables in sync:
> - mtu_set() will update both variables.
> - dev_configure() will update only max_rx_pkt_len, but will keep mtu intact.
>
> This patch fixes this inconsistency, which I think is a good thing.
> Though yes, it introduces change in behaviour.
>
> Let say the code:
> rte_eth_dev_set_mtu(port, 1500);
> dev_conf.max_rx_pkt_len = 1000;
> rte_eth_dev_configure(port, 1, 1, &dev_conf);
>
'rte_eth_dev_configure()' is one of the first APIs called, it is called before
'rte_eth_dev_set_mtu().
When 'rte_eth_dev_configure()' is called, MTU is set to '1500' by default by
ethdev layer, so it is not user configuration, but 'max_rx_pkt_len' is.
And later, when 'rte_eth_dev_set_mtu()' is called, but MTU and 'max_rx_pkt_len'
are updated (mostly).
> Before the patch will result:
> mtu==1500, max_rx_pkt_len=1000; //out of sync looks wrong to me
>
> After the patch:
> mtu=1500, max_rx_ptk_len=1518; // in sync, change in behaviour.
>
> If you think we need to preserve current behaviour,
> then I suppose the easiest thing would be to change dev_config() code
> to update mtu value based on max_rx_pkt_len.
> I.E: dev_configure {...; mtu_set(max_rx_pkt_len - OVERHEAD); ...}
> So the code snippet above will result:
> mtu=982,max_rx_pkt_len=1000;
>
The 'max_rx_ptk_len' is annoyance for a long time, what do you think to just
drop it?
By default device will be up with default MTU (1500), later
'rte_eth_dev_set_mtu' can be used to set the MTU, no frame size setting at all.
Will this work?
And for short term, for above Intel PMDs, there must be a place this
'max_rx_pkt_len' value taken into account (mostly 'start()' dev_ops), that
function can be updated to take 'max_rx_pkt_len' only if JUMBO_FRAME set,
otherwise use the 'MTU' value.
Without 'start()' updated the current logic won't work after stop & start anyway.
> Konstantin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>>
>>> And why this same thing can't happen to other PMDs? If this is a problem for
>>> all PMDs, we should solve in other level, not for only some PMDs.
>>>
>> No, all PMDs exist the same issue, another proposal:
>> - rte_ethdev provides the unique resize 'max_rx_pkt_len' in rte_eth_dev_configure();
>> - provide the uniform API for fetching the NIC's supported Ether Overhead size;
>> Is it feasible?
>>
>>>>
>>>>> Generally, the mtu value can be adjustable from user (e.g.: ip link
>>>>> set ens801f0 mtu 1400), hence, we just adjust the max_rx_pkt_len to
>>>>> satisfy mtu requirement.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Should we just call ice_mtu_set(dev, dev_conf.rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len)
>>>>>> here?
>>>>> ice_mtu_set(dev, mtu) will append ether overhead to
>>>>> frame_size/max_rx_pkt_len, so we need pass the mtu value as the 2nd
>>>>> parameter, or not the max_rx_pkt_len.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And please remove above comment, since ether overhead is already
>>>>>>> considered in ice_mtu_set.
>>>>> Ether overhead is already considered in ice_mtu_set, but it also
>>>>> should be considered as the adjustment condition that if ice_mtu_set
>>> need be invoked.
>>>>> So, it perhaps should remain this comment before this if() condition.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> +ret = ice_mtu_set(dev, dev->data->mtu); if (ret != 0) return
>>>>>>>>> +ret; }
>>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>>> ret = ice_init_rss(pf);
>>>>>>>>> if (ret) {
>>>>>>>>> PMD_DRV_LOG(ERR, "Failed to enable rss for PF");
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> 2.17.1
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-19 13:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-16 5:52 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 0/5] fix default max mtu size when device configured SteveX Yang
2020-09-16 5:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 1/5] net/e1000: fix max mtu size packets with vlan tag cannot be received by default SteveX Yang
2020-09-16 5:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 2/5] net/igc: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-16 5:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 3/5] net/ice: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-16 5:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 4/5] net/iavf: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-16 5:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1 5/5] net/i40e: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-16 14:41 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
[not found] ` <DM6PR11MB4362E5FF332551D12AA20017F93E0@DM6PR11MB4362.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2020-09-17 12:18 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-09-22 1:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/5] fix default max mtu size when device configured SteveX Yang
2020-09-22 1:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/5] net/e1000: fix max mtu size packets with vlan tag cannot be received by default SteveX Yang
2020-09-22 1:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/5] net/igc: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-22 1:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/5] net/ice: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-22 1:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/5] net/i40e: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-22 10:47 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-09-22 1:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/5] net/iavf: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-23 4:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/5] fix default max mtu size when device configured SteveX Yang
2020-09-23 4:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/5] net/e1000: fix max mtu size packets with vlan tag cannot be received by default SteveX Yang
2020-09-23 4:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/5] net/igc: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-23 4:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/5] net/ice: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-23 4:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/5] net/i40e: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-23 4:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 5/5] net/iavf: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-28 6:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/5] fix default max mtu size when device configured SteveX Yang
2020-09-28 6:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/5] net/e1000: fix max mtu size packets with vlan tag cannot be received by default SteveX Yang
2020-09-28 6:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/5] net/igc: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-28 6:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/5] net/ice: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-29 11:59 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2020-09-29 23:01 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-09-30 0:34 ` Zhang, Qi Z
[not found] ` <DM6PR11MB4362515283D00E27A793E6B0F9330@DM6PR11MB4362.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2020-09-30 2:32 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2020-10-14 15:38 ` Ferruh Yigit
[not found] ` <DM6PR11MB43628BBF9DCE7CC4D7C05AD8F91E0@DM6PR11MB4362.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2020-10-19 10:49 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-19 13:07 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2020-10-19 14:07 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-19 14:28 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-19 18:01 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-10-20 9:07 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-20 12:29 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-10-21 9:47 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-21 10:36 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-10-21 10:44 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-21 10:53 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-10-19 18:05 ` Ferruh Yigit
[not found] ` <DM6PR11MB4362F936BFC715BF6BABBAD0F91F0@DM6PR11MB4362.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2020-10-20 8:13 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-09-28 6:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/5] net/i40e: " SteveX Yang
2020-09-28 6:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 5/5] net/iavf: " SteveX Yang
2020-10-14 9:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/5] fix default max mtu size when device configured SteveX Yang
2020-10-14 9:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/5] net/e1000: fix max mtu size packets with vlan tag cannot be received by default SteveX Yang
2020-10-14 9:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/5] net/igc: " SteveX Yang
2020-10-14 9:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/5] net/ice: " SteveX Yang
2020-10-14 11:35 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2020-10-14 9:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/5] net/i40e: " SteveX Yang
2020-10-14 10:30 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-14 9:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/5] net/iavf: " SteveX Yang
2020-10-14 11:43 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/5] fix default max mtu size when device configured Zhang, Qi Z
2020-10-22 8:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/2] " SteveX Yang
2020-10-22 8:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] app/testpmd: fix max rx packet length for VLAN packets SteveX Yang
2020-10-22 16:22 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-10-22 8:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/2] librte_ethdev: fix MTU size exceeds max rx packet length SteveX Yang
2020-10-22 16:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-10-22 16:52 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-10-28 3:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/1] fix default max mtu size when device configured SteveX Yang
2020-10-28 3:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/1] app/testpmd: fix max rx packet length for VLAN packets SteveX Yang
2020-10-29 8:41 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-02 8:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/2] fix default max mtu size when device configured SteveX Yang
2020-11-02 8:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/2] app/testpmd: fix max rx packet length for VLAN packets SteveX Yang
2020-11-02 11:48 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-03 13:29 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-04 16:51 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-04 17:07 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-04 17:55 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-04 20:19 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-04 20:39 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-05 8:54 ` Andrew Rybchenko
[not found] ` <DM6PR11MB43622CC5DF485DD034037CD3F9EE0@DM6PR11MB4362.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2020-11-05 10:37 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-05 10:44 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-05 10:48 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-05 10:50 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-05 13:52 ` Olivier Matz
2020-11-05 15:11 ` Lance Richardson
2020-11-05 15:56 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-05 16:23 ` Lance Richardson
2020-11-05 17:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/1] app/testpmd: revert max Rx packet length adjustment Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-05 18:02 ` Lance Richardson
2020-11-05 18:11 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-05 18:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-11-05 10:49 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/2] app/testpmd: fix max rx packet length for VLAN packets Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-02 8:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/2] doc: annouce deprecation of jumbo frame flag condition SteveX Yang
2020-11-02 11:50 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-02 13:18 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-11-02 13:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-02 16:05 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
[not found] ` <DM6PR11MB43625C5CF594BEDC9CE479F7F9110@DM6PR11MB4362.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
2020-11-24 17:46 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-11-27 12:19 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-11-27 17:08 ` Bruce Richardson
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=483bd509-82b9-9724-d28c-c517ef091e0c@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=beilei.xing@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ian.stokes@intel.com \
--cc=jia.guo@intel.com \
--cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=qiming.yang@intel.com \
--cc=stevex.yang@intel.com \
--cc=wei.zhao1@intel.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).