From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pg0-f53.google.com (mail-pg0-f53.google.com [74.125.83.53]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 023E6914 for ; Sun, 5 Mar 2017 20:55:10 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-pg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id 187so4851429pgb.3 for ; Sun, 05 Mar 2017 11:55:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/yAPev/sMZux+GzGqwEawQURxRpdusk0+4g5HnBdOeg=; b=dmDdX2O4Ez3AgJ44I4iCUh8dtIutFYcix1rVts9TI6KYmqLX0kVNLyW5BdNWfD27kc 9dpy/Ngr1s3Xv8lQ2w3VcuonUzHO3eLvfV0/SVh4URjh/6un+FY3In7rIY2CQOTgIeYI g4oZlXA3l2wO2DdGmdpMwGFvHvV/vu2DbukZEL9dCinZKpHXbnuS9mSaGVrhyWVt0Jm9 DikccqLum/9FglVKevzc4aDMmnmypwUPlCqzrXGkynKQpZzTDnAJvpeQCcQndTZ00evc Kyy1s5vi5EaUsK5nTvB17PD/Z4i3guZxtsE9PKgYfH1q5PTVwU/SFw7wN99oE2jjIRUM HI+Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/yAPev/sMZux+GzGqwEawQURxRpdusk0+4g5HnBdOeg=; b=cAyQvBjYfzdbGbBjju9/CAxI73DDkkbXUzup9cGOrG1pOU2MJFUEZARQ7ZXVC9SDvd TBW3V9z1x+IgQVcuSgnKwuFelMy2ngsB8Kz5wqRFc8jQtCLevbEROm3aH+SuofeFnnQI U6vGlxIK5nAySyJAMybTxehYJDRb76qTdi5nlYU/iXHSr0IE6+/5yal1NTgRqf7MIh6l hQg8e4cy8fxYZlD2i7+2JoXxoHCZ8X6DO7rQwcsUrf2jSDS3x9dECHGVxmSMCTJPwSdY Y2s4m5OrUhmuAeA1BxcvPuY+dWJJsaghb66aSNFuCtckfmdZsNlepXvDN7vphriDiYIl ilfw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39ldwscoqmvo70qz9c8VjlOL+YsxBlfNW1vAK8KeKuhvO/P/mVFHk9t92br3F/A1YwMRagiPiOadyE2lLA== X-Received: by 10.84.217.215 with SMTP id d23mr20821317plj.33.1488743709793; Sun, 05 Mar 2017 11:55:09 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.100.128.202 with HTTP; Sun, 5 Mar 2017 11:55:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAC9B8B@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583FAC9B8B@IRSMSX109.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Ravi Kerur Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 11:55:09 -0800 Message-ID: To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "Richardson, Bruce" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 17.05 v1 0/3] Merge l3fwd-acl and l3fwd 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: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 19:55:11 -0000 Hi Konstantin, Thanks for the inputs. Initialization starts with ETH_RSS_IP and gets updated with L4 if ACL is selected in parse_args function. This change is to fix rss_hf. I have submitted 'v4' patch, please let me know if additional changes are needed. Thanks. On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin < konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote: > > Hi Ravi, > > > > > Hi Konstantin, > > > > Sorry for this one, I had to resend patch series as 'v3' as additional > checkpatch warnings were seen after the submission which didn't show > > up in my run. > > > > 'v3' patch should have all fixed except the ones I mentioned in my > earlier email on which I need inputs from you. > > > > Thanks. > > > > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 11:49 AM, Ravi Kerur wrote: > > Hi Konstantin, > > > > I have sent 'v2' patchset. I need clarifications on following things, if > they should be fixed I will send out 'v3' so please let me know. > > > > Following code changes were done by me manually, not merged. > > +++ b/examples/l3fwd/main.c > > @@ -161,7 +163,9 @@ static struct rte_eth_conf port_conf = { > > .rx_adv_conf = { > > .rss_conf = { > > .rss_key = NULL, > > - .rss_hf = ETH_RSS_IP, > > + .rss_hf = ETH_RSS_IP | ETH_RSS_UDP | > > + ETH_RSS_TCP | ETH_RSS_SCTP, > > + > > }, > > > > The reason I did it is because > > > > LPM/EM has .rss_hf = ETH_RSS_IP > > ACL has .rss_hf = ETH_RSS_IP | ETH_RSS_UDP | ETH_RSS_TCP | ETH_RSS_SCTP, > > > > ACL looks like a superset of LPM/EM and functional testing didn't reveal > any issues hence I kept ACL version. > > But at least for LPM, we probably don't want L4 ports affect packet > distribution? > Probably the safest way would be to have a separate port_conf for each > case (LPM/EM/ACL). > That way will preserve the original behavior. > > > > > 2. Checkpatch errors are all fixed. Some warnings are not fixed and they > are > > > > 2.a, string length greater than 80 characters > > 2.b GET_CB_FIELD macro. I could have changed GET_CB_FIELD to inline > function, however, function names cannot be in capital letters. I > > could have changed it to 'get_cb_field' inline function, but didn't do > it as I thought it may not be worth the change. > > It is ok by me to leave as it is by now. > Thanks > Konstantin > > > >