From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier MATZ Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/13] mbuf: add functions to get the name of an ol_flag Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 10:29:44 +0100 Message-ID: <546B1188.2090203@6wind.com> References: <1415635166-1364-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> <1415984609-2484-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> <1415984609-2484-7-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213AE5A1@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "jigsaw-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org" To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213AE5A1-kPTMFJFq+rEu0RiL9chJVbfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" Hi Konstantin, On 11/17/2014 08:00 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: >> +/* >> + * Get the name of a RX offload flag >> + */ >> +const char *rte_get_rx_ol_flag_name(uint64_t mask) >> +{ >> + switch (mask) { >> + case PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT: return "PKT_RX_VLAN_PKT"; >> + case PKT_RX_RSS_HASH: return "PKT_RX_RSS_HASH"; >> + case PKT_RX_FDIR: return "PKT_RX_FDIR"; >> + case PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD: return "PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_BAD"; >> + case PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_BAD: return "PKT_RX_IP_CKSUM_BAD"; >> + /* case PKT_RX_EIP_CKSUM_BAD: return "PKT_RX_EIP_CKSUM_BAD"; */ >> + /* case PKT_RX_OVERSIZE: return "PKT_RX_OVERSIZE"; */ >> + /* case PKT_RX_HBUF_OVERFLOW: return "PKT_RX_HBUF_OVERFLOW"; */ >> + /* case PKT_RX_RECIP_ERR: return "PKT_RX_RECIP_ERR"; */ >> + /* case PKT_RX_MAC_ERR: return "PKT_RX_MAC_ERR"; */ > > Didn't spot it before, wonder why do you need these 5 commented out lines? > In fact, why do we need these flags if they all equal to zero right now? > I know these flags were not introduced by that patch, in fact as I can see it was a temporary measure, > as old ol_flags were just 16 bits long: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-June/003308.html > So wonder should now these flags either get proper values or be removed? I would be in favor of removing them, or at least the following ones (I don't understand how they can help the application): - PKT_RX_OVERSIZE: Num of desc of an RX pkt oversize. - PKT_RX_HBUF_OVERFLOW: Header buffer overflow. - PKT_RX_RECIP_ERR: Hardware processing error. - PKT_RX_MAC_ERR: MAC error. I would have say that a statistics counter in the driver is more appropriate for this case (maybe there is already a counter in the hardware). I have no i40e hardware to test that, so I don't feel very comfortable to modify the i40e driver code to add these stats. Adding Helin in CC list, maybe he has an idea. Regards, Olivier