DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: "Liu, Jijiang" <jijiang.liu@intel.com>,
	 "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	"Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum forwarding engine
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 15:07:12 +0100
Message-ID: <54C64A10.2010906@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1ED644BD7E0A5F4091CF203DAFB8E4CC01DB6FD2@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>

Hi,

On 01/26/2015 07:02 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
>> I tried to repeat Olivier test-cases on my box.
>> Though, I didn't use test-pmd cusmonly and  i40ePMD logic, but filled TCD and
>> TDD mostly from hardcoded values.
>> That's  what I got:
>>
>> 4 input packets:
>> a) ETHER/IPv4/UDP/VXLAN/ETHER/IPV4/TCP
>> b) ETHER/IPv4/GRE/ETHER/IPV4/TCP
>> c) ETHER/IPv4/GRE/IPV4/TCP
>> d) ETHER/IPv4/IPV4/TCP
>>
>> 1/ L4TUNT==1(I40E_TXD_CTX_UDP_TUNNELING):
>> a),b): all checksums ok
>> c),d): not transmitted by HW.
>>
>> 2/ L4TUNT==2(I40E_TXD_CTX_GRE_TUNNELING):
>> a) b),c): all checksums ok
>> d): not transmitted by HW.
>>
>> 3/ L4TUNT==0(UNKNOWN):
>> a),b),c),d): all checksums ok
>>
>> So yes, it seems that L4TUNT==0 works perfectly ok for all cases, as long as
>> L4TUNLEN and other TCD values are setup properly.
>> Which makes me think, that  probably we can do what you suggested: just use
>> L4TUNT=0 for all cases.
>> Though as Jijiang said, we waiting for confirmation from FVL guys, that there are
>> no hidden implications with that approach.
> 
> Yes, the L4TUNT=0 is ok  for all cases.

Great! Thanks for testing on your side too.

> But we still need to get confirmation from FVL guys, probably there are some issues in HW/FW.
> I and Helin will confirm this with FVL guys ASAP.

OK, thank you.

>> Another thing - IPIP seems to work ok by HW.
>> There is something wrong on our (PMD/test-pmd) side.
>> I think at least we have to remove the following check:
>> if (!l2_len) {
>>                 PMD_DRV_LOG(DEBUG, "L2 length set to 0");
>>                 return;
>>         }
>> in i40e_txd_enable_checksum().
> 
> Yes, for IPIP, the check should be removed.

Yes, I think these lines should be removed for 2 reasons:
- it may be the cause of ipip tunnel not working
- we shouldn't do these kind of tests in dataplane. I think we have to
  suppose that the data passed to the PMD is valid.

I'll redo the test with ipip tomorrow with this fix and let you
know the result. If it works, I'll add this in the next version
of the patch.

Regards,
Olivier

  reply	other threads:[~2015-01-26 14:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-12-10  1:03 Jijiang Liu
2014-12-10  1:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] librte_ether:add outer IP offload capability flag Jijiang Liu
2014-12-11 10:33   ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-10  1:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] i40e:support outer IPv4 checksum capability Jijiang Liu
2014-12-11 10:34   ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-10  1:03 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] app/testpmd:change tx_checksum command and csum forwarding engine Jijiang Liu
2014-12-11 10:52   ` Olivier MATZ
2014-12-12  4:06     ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-12-11 10:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum " Olivier MATZ
2014-12-12  3:48   ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-12-12 16:33     ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-07  2:03       ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-07  9:59         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-07 11:39           ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-07 12:07             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-08  8:51               ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-08 10:54                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-09 10:45                   ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-12  3:41                     ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-12 11:43                       ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-13  3:04                         ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-13  9:55                           ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-14  3:01                             ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-15 13:31                               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-16 17:27                                 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-19 13:04                                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-19 14:38                                     ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-20  1:12                                       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-20 12:39                                         ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-20 15:18                                           ` Thomas Monjalon
2015-01-20 17:10                                             ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-01-20 17:23                                           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-20 18:15                                             ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-21  3:12                                               ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-21 15:25                                                 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-21 16:28                                                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-21 17:13                                                     ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-26  4:13                                                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-26  6:02                                                     ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-26 14:07                                                       ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2015-01-26 14:15                                                         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-27  8:34                                                           ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-27 15:26                                                             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-21 19:44                                                 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-01-22  1:40                                                   ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-21  8:01                                               ` Liu, Jijiang
2015-01-21  9:10                                                 ` Olivier MATZ
2015-01-21 11:52                                                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-01-07 13:06 ` Qiu, Michael

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=54C64A10.2010906@6wind.com \
    --to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=helin.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=jijiang.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git