From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from m15-54.126.com (m15-54.126.com [220.181.15.54]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71483156 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 03:39:08 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=126.com; s=s110527; h=Received:Date:From:To:Subject:Content-Type: MIME-Version:Message-ID; bh=I+syt+uyVMr3XUKSodNuOP9AkxabJwI5hNx+ Uo/e2Tw=; b=M6Ju4mRL7SM9nni8aoAL3gByAXGDhV9Vs2OyaMBqgAuMETJvc/Ee xluWHyP8WO4SutpcEYehLv9odSVFojE7DAWyd+TpeTMKzrLAtE+gVvcxap30C6vA 82nNBFyT1zv0UsTUiX2ZO28SC6TkRNH/9A4l1OyNnubKHIdTgPjPCZI= Received: from mydpdk$126.com ( [54.250.153.202, 54.215.2.217] ) by ajax-webmail-wmsvr54 (Coremail) ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:40:03 +0800 (CST) X-Originating-IP: [54.250.153.202, 54.215.2.217] Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:40:03 +0800 (CST) From: "William Rolinson" To: "dev@dpdk.org" X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Coremail Webmail Server Version SP_ntes V3.5 build 20131012(23719.5622.5618) Copyright (c) 2002-2013 www.mailtech.cn 126com X-CM-CTRLDATA: M7l2KWZvb3Rlcl9odG09MTUxOjgx MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: X-CM-TRANSID: NsqowECJgUUExI5SYZXIAA--.10593W X-CM-SenderInfo: hp1g1vbn6rjloofrz/1tbitRjciEX9oWBZBQABsd X-Coremail-Antispam: 1U5529EdanIXcx71UUUUU7vcSsGvfC2KfnxnUU== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=GBK Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: [dpdk-dev] How to calculate checksum automically with NIC when sending a packet? 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, 22 Nov 2013 02:39:09 -0000 UlR+Cg== >From decimen@gmail.com Fri Nov 22 08:29:24 2013 Return-Path: Received: from mail-la0-x22f.google.com (mail-la0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::22f]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 178AB156 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:29:23 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-la0-f47.google.com with SMTP id ep20so619784lab.34 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 23:30:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=fZfozN+8cSwoWqFg0dDq4fTmcXHI6lHrf9XUvb/4Pas=; b=wvS2wo92NQDBwfn6VwV0fI6sTrojaMc4k5D/Gos0cW4U1RiCGpQciUevZuZTCFibDH wJs7OphPinrvFRqBF1vVhQAsq/F8rU7qY50LWF+oTpr3bhAvSxy8TxlhrzpSPVhJeHOg feDHum7v+hKSKhJz3iV430mwDZ1i6JEpNfqfglbNjTHoazDVZp5V5mpsEkuuZ9iarZGi UNVB+nEReUFDJYBh+vXielczq9x2fjrq1rfdmwu5QXICTV6z/lu4Z7BbwEGHhqoap3QQ hLA9vtaMIU2zJlVq0Y1xyI/pWPC3OLuwT06yD9umafXHmR3LUD6Z0mwcZTNv9J0IXkx6 DENw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.3.42 with SMTP id 10mr8653526laz.22.1385105422167; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 23:30:22 -0800 (PST) Sender: decimen@gmail.com Received: by 10.112.58.201 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 23:30:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2031360.6MEvh5xnbq@x220> References: <2031360.6MEvh5xnbq@x220> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 08:30:22 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: VnZQLsn4J9sn2Zgrf9R1dGeFl3Q Message-ID: From: Ognjen Joldzic To: Thomas Monjalon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] 82546EB Copper issue 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, 22 Nov 2013 07:29:24 -0000 Hi. Actually, the support for 82546EB Copper NIC is already there. All it takes to make it work is one line in rte_pci_dev_ids.h: RTE_PCI_DEV_ID_DECL_EM(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, E1000_DEV_ID_82546EB_COPPER) Not much of a patch, I guess :) On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 8:57 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > Hello, > > 19/11/2013 23:44, Ognjen Joldzic : > > Recently I came across a 82546EB Dual-port Gigabit Ethernet (Copper) NIC > > and tried to include it in our current DPDK setup. However, the card > > doesn't seem to be supported (I was unable to bind the igb_uio driver). > > There was a post in mailing list earlier this year stating that this > > particular NIC is not supported as of r1.2.3. > > Is the situation any different with the 1.5.0 release (or are there any > > plans to support this model)? > > The page http://dpdk.org/doc/nics says that 8254x should be supported. > But looking in details: > % grep 'RTE_PCI_DEV_ID_DECL.*8254' > lib/librte_eal/common/include/rte_pci_dev_ids.h > RTE_PCI_DEV_ID_DECL_EM(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, E1000_DEV_ID_82540EM) > RTE_PCI_DEV_ID_DECL_EM(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, E1000_DEV_ID_82545EM_COPPER) > RTE_PCI_DEV_ID_DECL_EM(PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL, E1000_DEV_ID_82545EM_FIBER) > > It means that only 82540 and 82545 are supported. > I don't know if there is a big difference with 82546 controller > and I'm not aware of any plan to support it. > So feel free to try and patch it. > > -- > Thomas >