DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "didier.pallard" <didier.pallard@6wind.com>
To: jijiang.liu@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] mbuf:replace the inner_l2_len and the inner_l3_len fields
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2014 15:53:29 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <547DD269.2080500@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1417503172-18642-4-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com>

Hello,

On 12/02/2014 07:52 AM, Jijiang Liu wrote:
> Replace the inner_l2_len and the inner_l3_len field with the outer_l2_len and outer_l3_len field, and rework csum forward engine and i40e PMD due to  these changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jijiang Liu <jijiang.liu@intel.com>
[...]
> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> @@ -276,8 +276,8 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
>   			uint64_t tso_segsz:16; /**< TCP TSO segment size */
>   
>   			/* fields for TX offloading of tunnels */
> -			uint64_t inner_l3_len:9; /**< inner L3 (IP) Hdr Length. */
> -			uint64_t inner_l2_len:7; /**< inner L2 (MAC) Hdr Length. */
> +			uint64_t outer_l3_len:9; /**< Outer L3 (IP) Hdr Length. */
> +			uint64_t outer_l2_len:7; /**< Outer L2 (MAC) Hdr Length. */
>   
>   			/* uint64_t unused:8; */
>   		};

Sorry for entering lately this discussion, but i'm not convinced by the 
choice of outer_lx_len rather than inner_lx_len for new fields.
I agree with Olivier that new flags should only be related to the use of 
new fields, to maintain coherency with oldest implementations.
But from a stack point of view, i think it is better to have lx_len 
fields that target the outer layers, and to name new fields inner_lx_len.

Let's discuss the two possibilities.

1) outer_lx_len fields are introduced.
In this case, the stack should have knowledge that it is processing 
tunneled packets to use outer_lx_len rather than lx_len,
or stack should always use outer_lx_len packet and move those fields to 
lx_len packets if no tunneling occurs...
I think it will induce extra processing that does not seem to be really 
needed.

2) inner_lx_len fields are introduced.
In this case, the stack first uses lx_len fields. When packet should be 
tunneled, lx_len fields are moved to inner_lx_len fields.
Then the stack can process the outer layer and still use the lx_len fields.

For  example:
an eth/IP/TCP forged packet will look like this:

Ether/IP/UDP/xxx
   m->flags = IP_CKSUM
   m->l2_len = sizeof(ether)
   m->l3_len = sizeof(ip)
   m->l4_len = sizeof(udp)
   m->inner_l2_len = 0
   m->inner_l3_len = 0

When entering tunnel for example a VXLAN interface, lx_len will be moved 
to inner_lx_len

Ether/IP/UDP/xxx
   m->flags = INNER_IP_CKSUM
   m->l2_len = 0
   m->l3_len = 0
   m->l4_len = 0
   m->inner_l2_len = sizeof(ether)
   m->inner_l3_len = sizeof(ip)
  

once complete encapsulation is processed by the stack, the packet will 
look like

Ether/IP/UDP/VXLAN/Ether/IP/UDP/xxx
   m->flags = IP_CKSUM | INNER_IP_CKSUM
   m->l2_len = sizeof(ether)
   m->l3_len = sizeof(ip)
   m->l4_len = sizeof(udp)
   m->inner_l2_len = sizeof(ether) + sizeof (vxlan)
   m->inner_l3_len = sizeof(ip)


didier

  reply	other threads:[~2014-12-02 14:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-02  6:52 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/3] i40e VXLAN TX checksum rework Jijiang Liu
2014-12-02  6:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] mbuf:redefine three TX ol_flags Jijiang Liu
2014-12-02  6:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] mbuf:add three TX ol_flags and repalce PKT_TX_VXLAN_CKSUM Jijiang Liu
2014-12-02  6:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] mbuf:replace the inner_l2_len and the inner_l3_len fields Jijiang Liu
2014-12-02 14:53   ` didier.pallard [this message]
2014-12-02 15:36     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-03  8:57       ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-03 11:11         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2014-12-03 11:27           ` Olivier MATZ

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=547DD269.2080500@6wind.com \
    --to=didier.pallard@6wind.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jijiang.liu@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).