From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCD77282 for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:41:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from was59-1-82-226-113-214.fbx.proxad.net ([82.226.113.214] helo=[192.168.0.10]) by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YCAx1-0002kq-Fi; Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:44:54 +0100 Message-ID: <54B94D35.5040305@6wind.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 18:41:09 +0100 From: Olivier MATZ User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jijiang Liu , dev@dpdk.org References: <1421375468-18083-1-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> <1421375468-18083-2-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <1421375468-18083-2-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] i40e:support i40e TSO 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, 16 Jan 2015 17:41:20 -0000 Hi Jijiang, On 01/16/2015 03:31 AM, Jijiang Liu wrote: > This patch enables i40e TSO feature for both non-tunneling packet and UDP tunneling packet. > > Signed-off-by: Jijiang Liu > Signed-off-by: Miroslaw Walukiewicz > --- > lib/librte_pmd_i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 3 +- > lib/librte_pmd_i40e/i40e_rxtx.c | 111 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > lib/librte_pmd_i40e/i40e_rxtx.h | 13 ++++ > 3 files changed, 98 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-) At first sight, the patch looks good, but I think one information is missing: how it was validated? Did you use csumonly? As we have a pending discussion on how to rework it, I think I should include this test case in the specification. A description of which mbufs fields should be filled in case of tunneling packet would be useful for people willing to use this API. Does it match the case 8) of http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-January/011127.html ? Regards, Olivier