From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BAEC101B for ; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 18:06:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Mar 2017 09:06:17 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,237,1486454400"; d="scan'208";a="839345347" Received: from fmsmsx106.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.204]) by FMSMGA003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Mar 2017 09:06:16 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx113.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.13.235]) by FMSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.54]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Tue, 28 Mar 2017 09:06:08 -0700 From: "Wiles, Keith" To: "Hu, Jiayu" CC: Olivier Matz , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , Yuanhan Liu , "Richardson, Bruce" , Stephen Hemminger , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Liang, Cunming" , Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] lib: add TCP IPv4 GRO support Thread-Index: AQHSou9HGbI2XQXRT0SMpTSJ0l69vaGhXiuAgADH34CAADY2gIAAD3+AgAAqRwCAABfzgIAAL+AAgADcygCAAEHVgIAAEc0AgAAMT4CAADypAIAAMHAAgAAGKgCAAAJigIAGMOWAgAAE6gCAACPbAA== Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:06:07 +0000 Message-ID: References: <1B893F1B-4DA8-4F88-9583-8C0BAA570832@intel.com> <20170323021502.GA114662@localhost.localdomain> <20170323062433.GA120139@localhost.localdomain> <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B066729E3F@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> <20170323102135.GA124301@localhost.localdomain> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAD410A@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> <20170324022310.GA129105@localhost.localdomain> <32FED22E-7116-4B6A-894E-C81CBF7B4BBE@intel.com> <20170324072230.GU18844@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com> <20170324080633.GA2865@localhost.localdomain> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAD80A6@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> <0C56AF3E-C8AB-4903-AD34-F39C6D74C889@intel.com> <20170324155906.4b88a38d@platinum> <91037BB1-915A-4FFA-A839-DB474027F3CC@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.254.46.132] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] lib: add TCP IPv4 GRO support 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: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:06:18 -0000 > On Mar 28, 2017, at 8:57 AM, Hu, Jiayu wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Wiles, Keith >> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2017 9:40 PM >> To: Olivier Matz >> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin ; Hu, Jiayu >> ; Yuanhan Liu ; >> Richardson, Bruce ; Stephen Hemminger >> ; Yigit, Ferruh ; >> dev@dpdk.org; Liang, Cunming ; Thomas >> Monjalon >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] lib: add TCP IPv4 GRO support >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Mar 24, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Wiles, Keith wrot= e: >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On Mar 24, 2017, at 9:59 AM, Olivier Matz >> wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:37:04 +0000, "Wiles, Keith" >> wrote: >>>>>> On Mar 24, 2017, at 6:43 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin >> wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> [...] >>>>=20 >>>>>> Yep, that's what my take from the beginning: >>>>>> Let's develop a librte_gro first and make it successful, then we can= think >> should >>>>>> we (and how) put into ethdev layer. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Let not create a gro library and put the code into librte_net as size= is not >> a concern yet and it is the best place to put the code. As for ip_frag s= omeone >> can move it into librte_net if someone writes the patch. >>>>=20 >>>> The size of a library _is_ an argument. Not the binary size in bytes, = but >>>> its API, because that's what the developper sees. Today, librte_net >> contains >>>> protocol headers definitions and some network helpers, and the API >> surface >>>> is already quite big (look at the number of lines of .h files). >>>>=20 >>>> I really like having a library name which matches its content. >>>> The anwser to "what can I find in librte_gro?" is quite obvious. >>>=20 >>> If we are going to talk about API surface area lets talk about ethdev t= hen :-) >>>=20 >>> Ok, lets create a new librte_gro, but I am not convinced it is reasonab= le. >> Maybe a better generic name is needed if we are going to add GSO to the >> library too. So a new name for the lib is better then librte_gro, unless= you are >> going to create another library for GSO. >>>=20 >>> I still think the design needs to be integrated in as a real offload as= I stated >> before and that is not something I am willing let drop. >>=20 >> I guess we agree to create the library librte_gro and the current code n= eeds >> to be updated to be include as a real offload support to DPDK as I see n= o real >> conclusion to this topic. >=20 > OK, I have known your opinions, and I agree with you. I will provide a re= al offloading > example to demonstrate the usage of librte_gro in the next patch. Thanks >=20 > Thanks, > Jiayu >>=20 >>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> Regards >>>> Olivier >>>=20 >>> Regards, >>> Keith >>=20 >> Regards, >> Keith Regards, Keith