From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 12/12] virtio: add Tso support
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 23:04:04 +0800
Message-ID: <20161013150404.GY16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
References: <1475485223-30566-1-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <1475485223-30566-13-git-send-email-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <20161013081839.GT16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <57FF9409.2090205@6wind.com>
 <20161013141654.GW16751@yliu-dev.sh.intel.com>
 <57FF9FA9.8020403@6wind.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, konstantin.ananyev@intel.com, sugesh.chandran@intel.com,
 bruce.richardson@intel.com, jianfeng.tan@intel.com,
 helin.zhang@intel.com, adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com,
 stephen@networkplumber.org, dprovan@bivio.net, xiao.w.wang@intel.com
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21010FE5
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 13 Oct 2016 17:03:10 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <57FF9FA9.8020403@6wind.com>
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 04:52:25PM +0200, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> >In the "else" clause, the ip header is still in the mbuf, right?
> >Why do you have to access it the way like:
> >
> >	ip_version = *rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(m, uint8_t *,
> >		m->l2_len) >> 4;
> >
> >Why can't you just use
> >
> >	iph = rte_pktmbuf_mtod_offset(m, struct ipv4_hdr *, m->l2_len);
> >	iph->version_ihl ....;
> 
> AFAIK, there is no requirement that each network header has to be contiguous
> in a mbuf segment.
> 
> Of course, a split in the middle of a network header probably never
> happens... but we never knows, as it is not forbidden. I think the code
> should be robust enough to avoid accesses to wrong addresses.

One more question is do you have any case to trigger the "else" clause?

	--yliu