Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net/mlx5: separate generic tunnel TSO from the standard one

[Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>]

Monday, June 25, 2018 2:33 PM, Nélio Laranjeiro:
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/mlx5: separate generic tunnel TSO from the
> standard one
> 
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 11:23:22AM +0000, Shahaf Shuler wrote:
> > Monday, June 25, 2018 9:41 AM , Nélio Laranjeiro:
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/mlx5: separate generic tunnel TSO from the
> > > standard one
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 09:22:26AM +0300, Shahaf Shuler wrote:
> > > > The generic tunnel TSO was depended in the regular one
> > > > capabilities to be enabled.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>
> > > > Acked-by: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_txq.c | 13 +++++++++----
> > > >  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > -	txq_ctrl->txq.tunnel_en = config->tunnel_en;
> > > > +	txq_ctrl->txq.tunnel_en = config->tunnel_en | config->swp;
> > > >  	txq_ctrl->txq.swp_en = ((DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_IP_TNL_TSO |
> > > >  				 DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TNL_TSO |
> > > >  				 DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_IPV4_CKSUM) &
> > > > --
> > > > 2.12.0
> > > >
> > >
> > > Is not it a fix?
> >
> > Well, more like optimization. To be less strict on when to enable the
> > generic tunnel TSO.
> > I can rephrase the title if you insist.
> 
> I was asking due to the CC'ed stable, which is generally used when the it is a
> fix.  I don't know how the stable maintainers trigger such patch, that why I
> am asking.
> 
> I am not insisting in any thing here.
> 
> By the way:
> Acked-by: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>

Applied to next-net-mlx, thanks. 

> 
> --
> Nélio Laranjeiro
> 6WIND