DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Tan, Jianfeng" <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "thomas.monjalon@6wind.com" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
	"De Lara Guarch, Pablo" <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>,
	"Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
	"Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>,
	"Tao, Zhe" <zhe.tao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] app/testpmd: fix Tx offload on tunneling packet
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:29:08 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f796397f-0f02-f802-76e4-a1668be7f960@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0B9C94@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>

Hi Konstantin,


On 9/21/2016 11:47 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> Hi Jianfeng,
>
>> Hi Konstantin,
>>
>>
>> On 9/19/2016 8:09 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>>> Hi Jainfeng,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Tan, Jianfeng
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 1, 2016 4:57 AM
>>>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>>>> Cc: thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; De Lara Guarch, Pablo
>>>> <pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
>>>> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>;
>>>> Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang@intel.com>; Tan, Jianfeng
>>>> <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>; Tao, Zhe <zhe.tao@intel.com>
>>>> Subject: [PATCH v4 3/3] app/testpmd: fix Tx offload on tunneling
>>>> packet
>>>>
>>>> Tx offload on tunneling packet now requires applications to correctly
>>>> set tunneling type. Without setting it, i40e driver does not parse
>>>> tunneling parameters. Besides that, add a check to see if NIC supports TSO on tunneling packet when executing "csum
>> parse_tunnel on _port"
>>>> after "tso set _size _port" or the other way around.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: b51c47536a9e ("app/testpmd: support TSO in checksum forward
>>>> engine")
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhe Tao <zhe.tao@intel.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Jianfeng Tan <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    app/test-pmd/cmdline.c  | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>>    app/test-pmd/csumonly.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>>>    2 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> @@ -745,7 +762,7 @@ pkt_burst_checksum_forward(struct fwd_stream *fs)
>>>>    		 * processed in hardware. */
>>>>    		if (info.is_tunnel == 1) {
>>>>    			ol_flags |= process_outer_cksums(outer_l3_hdr, &info,
>>>> -				testpmd_ol_flags);
>>>> +				testpmd_ol_flags, ol_flags & PKT_TX_TCP_SEG);
>>>>    		}
>>>>
>>>>    		/* step 4: fill the mbuf meta data (flags and header lengths) */
>>>> @@ -806,6 +823,10 @@
>>> It was a while since I looked a t it closely, but shouldn't you also update step 4 below:
>>>
>>> if (info.is_tunnel == 1) {
>>>                           if (testpmd_ol_flags & TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_IP_CKSUM) {
>>>                                   m->outer_l2_len = info.outer_l2_len;
>>>                                   m->outer_l3_len = info.outer_l3_len;
>>>                                   m->l2_len = info.l2_len;
>>>                                   m->l3_len = info.l3_len;
>>>                                   m->l4_len = info.l4_len;
>>>                           }
>>>                           else {
>>>                                   /* if there is a outer UDP cksum
>>>                                      processed in sw and the inner in hw,
>>>                                      the outer checksum will be wrong as
>>>                                      the payload will be modified by the
>>>                                      hardware */
>>>                                   m->l2_len = info.outer_l2_len +
>>>                                           info.outer_l3_len + info.l2_len;
>>>                                   m->l3_len = info.l3_len;
>>>                                   m->l4_len = info.l4_len;
>>>                           }
>>>
>>>
>>> ?
>>>
>>> In particular shouldn't it be something like:
>>> if ((testpmd_ol_flags & TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_IP_CKSUM) != 0 ||
>>>         ((testmpd_ol_flags & TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_PARSE_TUNNEL) != 0 &&
>>> info.tso_segsz != 0)) { ....
>>> ?
>> Sorry for late response, because I also take some time to refresh memory. And, you are right, I missed this corner case. After applying
>> your way above, it works!
>>
>> The case below settings in testpmd:
>> $ set fwd csum
>> $ csum parse_tunnel on 0
>> $ tso set 800 0
>> <keep outer-ip checksum offload is sw>
> Great :)
>
>> And unfortunately, our previous verification is based on "outer-ip checksum offload is hw".
>>
>>> Another thought, might be it is worth to introduce new flag:
>>> TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_TSO_TUNNEL, and new command in cmdline.c, that would set/clear that flag.
>>> Instead of trying to make assumptions does user wants tso for tunneled
>>> packets based on 2 different things:
>>> - enable/disable tso
>>> - enable/disable tunneled packets parsing ?
>> Currently, if we do parse_tunnel is based on the command "csum parse_tunnel on/off <port>".
>> If we add a command like "tso_tunnel set <length> <port>", it's a little duplicated with "tso set <length> <port>", and there is too
>> much info to just set a flag like TESTPMD_TX_OFFLOAD_TSO_TUNNEL; If we add a command like "csum tunnel_tso on <port>", it also
>> depends on "csum parse_tunnel on <port>" so that tunnel packets are parsed.
> But I thought in some cases user might want to enable tunnel parsing, but do tso for non-tunneled packets only.
> I.E.
>   - enable tunnel parsing
> - for non-tunneled packets do tso
> - for tunneled packets don't do tso
> My understanding that with current set commands/flags this is not possible, correct?
> Konstantin

Yes, correct, above case is not supported now. A twin case would be:
- for non-tunneled packets, don't do tso
- for tunneled packets, do tso

Considering above two cases, so how about adding a command like;
$ tunnel_tso set 800 0
which needs "csum parse_tunnel on 0" has been set before it.

And original "tso set 800 0" will only control tso of non-tunneled packets.
?


Thanks,
Jianfeng

  reply	other threads:[~2016-09-22  1:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-05 20:59 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] i40: fix the VXLAN TSO issue Zhe Tao
2016-07-06  5:38 ` Wu, Jingjing
2016-07-07  4:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Zhe Tao
2016-07-07 10:01   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-07 10:50   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-07 12:24     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-15 15:40       ` Bruce Richardson
2016-07-18  2:57       ` Zhe Tao
2016-07-18 11:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Zhe Tao
2016-07-19 10:29     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-26 12:22       ` Tan, Jianfeng
2016-07-29  7:11     ` Tan, Jianfeng
2016-07-29  8:45       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-29 10:11         ` Tan, Jianfeng
2016-10-10  3:58   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Wu, Jingjing
2016-10-10  4:14     ` Yuanhan Liu
2016-08-01  3:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/3] Add TSO on tunneling packet Jianfeng Tan
2016-08-01  3:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] mbuf: add Tx side tunneling type Jianfeng Tan
2016-08-01  3:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] net/i40e: add TSO support on tunneling packet Jianfeng Tan
2016-08-01  3:56   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] app/testpmd: fix Tx offload " Jianfeng Tan
2016-09-19 12:09     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-09-21 12:36       ` Tan, Jianfeng
2016-09-21 15:47         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-09-22  1:29           ` Tan, Jianfeng [this message]
2016-09-22  9:15             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
     [not found]   ` <ED26CBA2FAD1BF48A8719AEF02201E364E5E09BC@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
     [not found]     ` <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836BA2698@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
2016-09-27 17:29       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/3] Add TSO " Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-09-27 17:52         ` Tan, Jianfeng
2016-09-27 19:47           ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-09 21:27         ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-09-26 13:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] app/testpmd: support tunneled TSO in csum fwd engine Jianfeng Tan
2016-09-27 17:25   ` Ananyev, Konstantin

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=f796397f-0f02-f802-76e4-a1668be7f960@intel.com \
    --to=jianfeng.tan@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=helin.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=pablo.de.lara.guarch@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
    --cc=zhe.tao@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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).