* [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO (Transmit Segmentation Offload)
@ 2014-10-20  9:42 miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w
       [not found] ` <20141020094252.14456.58891.stgit-tpi2AMbES9qir5R1eWH9hGt3HXsI98Cx0E9HWUfgJXw@public.gmane.org>
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w @ 2014-10-20  9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev-VfR2kkLFssw
From: Miroslaw Walukiewicz <miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
Add new  PKT_TX_TCP_SEG flag
Add new fields in the tx offload fields indicating MSS and L4 len
Signed-off-by: Mirek Walukiewicz <miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h |   23 ++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index ddadc21..bcb09b9 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -114,6 +114,9 @@ extern "C" {
 /* Bit 51 - IEEE1588*/
 #define PKT_TX_IEEE1588_TMST (1ULL << 51) /**< TX IEEE1588 packet to timestamp. */
 
+/* Bit 49 - TCP transmit segmenation offload */
+#define PKT_TX_TCP_SEG (1ULL << 49) /**< TX TSO offload */
+ 
 /* Use final bit of flags to indicate a control mbuf */
 #define CTRL_MBUF_FLAG       (1ULL << 63) /**< Mbuf contains control data */
 
@@ -189,12 +192,22 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	struct rte_mbuf *next;    /**< Next segment of scattered packet. */
 
 	/* fields to support TX offloads */
-	union {
-		uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 lengths as single var */
-		struct {
-			uint16_t l3_len:9;      /**< L3 (IP) Header Length. */
-			uint16_t l2_len:7;      /**< L2 (MAC) Header Length. */
+	/* two bytes - l2/l3 len for compatibility (endian issues)
+	 * two bytes - reseved for alignment
+	 * two bytes - l4 len (TCP/UDP) header len
+	 * two bytes - TCP tso segment size 
+ 	 */
+	struct {
+		union {
+			uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 len */
+			struct {
+				uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header */
+				uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header */
+			};
 		};
+		uint16_t reserved_tx_offload;
+		uint16_t l4_len;            /**< TCP/UDP header len */
+		uint16_t tso_segsz;         /**< TCP TSO segment size */
 	};
 } __rte_cache_aligned;
 
^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread[parent not found: <20141020094252.14456.58891.stgit-tpi2AMbES9qir5R1eWH9hGt3HXsI98Cx0E9HWUfgJXw@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO (Transmit Segmentation Offload) [not found] ` <20141020094252.14456.58891.stgit-tpi2AMbES9qir5R1eWH9hGt3HXsI98Cx0E9HWUfgJXw@public.gmane.org> @ 2014-10-20 11:30 ` Thomas Monjalon 2014-10-20 12:45 ` Walukiewicz, Miroslaw 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2014-10-20 11:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w; +Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw Hi Miroslaw, I'll try to comment your patch, but I don't know if you'll receive it. Indeed, you didn't reply to the previous comments. Please configure your email client to receive these emails. This is not a write-only list. 2014-10-20 05:42, miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org: > Add new PKT_TX_TCP_SEG flag > Add new fields in the tx offload fields indicating MSS and L4 len You should explain why these additions are needed. > /* fields to support TX offloads */ > - union { > - uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 lengths as single var */ > - struct { > - uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header Length. */ > - uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header Length. */ > + /* two bytes - l2/l3 len for compatibility (endian issues) > + * two bytes - reseved for alignment > + * two bytes - l4 len (TCP/UDP) header len > + * two bytes - TCP tso segment size > + */ > + struct { > + union { > + uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 len */ > + struct { > + uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header */ > + uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header */ > + }; > }; Why nesting these fields in an anonymous structure? > + uint16_t reserved_tx_offload; > + uint16_t l4_len; /**< TCP/UDP header len */ > + uint16_t tso_segsz; /**< TCP TSO segment size */ > }; What means reserved_tx_offload? Is there an impact on performance of actual drivers ? How this patch is related with previous work in progress about TSO? -- Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO (Transmit Segmentation Offload) 2014-10-20 11:30 ` Thomas Monjalon @ 2014-10-20 12:45 ` Walukiewicz, Miroslaw [not found] ` <7C4248CAE043B144B1CD242D275626532FDE0709-kPTMFJFq+rGvNW/NfzhIbrfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Walukiewicz, Miroslaw @ 2014-10-20 12:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Hi Thomas, Thank for your comments. My responses are inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org] > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 1:30 PM > To: Walukiewicz, Miroslaw > Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO > (Transmit Segmentation Offload) > > Hi Miroslaw, > > I'll try to comment your patch, but I don't know if you'll receive it. > Indeed, you didn't reply to the previous comments. > Please configure your email client to receive these emails. > This is not a write-only list. > > 2014-10-20 05:42, miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org: > > Add new PKT_TX_TCP_SEG flag > > Add new fields in the tx offload fields indicating MSS and L4 len > > You should explain why these additions are needed. I will resend a patch with better description of new fields. > > > /* fields to support TX offloads */ > > - union { > > - uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 lengths as single var > */ > > - struct { > > - uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header Length. */ > > - uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header Length. > */ > > + /* two bytes - l2/l3 len for compatibility (endian issues) > > + * two bytes - reseved for alignment > > + * two bytes - l4 len (TCP/UDP) header len > > + * two bytes - TCP tso segment size > > + */ > > + struct { > > + union { > > + uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 len */ > > + struct { > > + uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header */ > > + uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header */ > > + }; > > }; > > Why nesting these fields in an anonymous structure? I want to keep a source compatibility with non-TSO applications using that field for example IP checksum computing by NIC. Keeping this structure anonymous I do not require changes in old applications that do not need TSO support. The second argument is that in original patch extending the rte_mbuf to 128 bytes made by Bruce the author made this structure anonymous and I follow this assumption too. > > > + uint16_t reserved_tx_offload; > > + uint16_t l4_len; /**< TCP/UDP header len */ > > + uint16_t tso_segsz; /**< TCP TSO segment size */ > > }; > > What means reserved_tx_offload? It is really for alignment. I want to keep all this structure 8 byte long. Really I found an issue in my patch. I think that all tx offload fields should be available in single 64-bit dword to make correct operation on in pkt_mbuf_reset and pkt_mbuf_attach. Today these macros use only first 32-bits from structure and keeps l4_len and tso_segsz untouched. I will modify my patch also in this direction. > > Is there an impact on performance of actual drivers ? > I did not observed on my machine any significant differences when aligned and non-aligned structure is used. I agree that alignment is important for small packets. The TSO is used for using very long TCP segments usually. > How this patch is related with previous work in progress about TSO? > As the original Bruce's patch defining a new rte_mbuf structure did not follow exactly the concept proposed by Olivier Matz I made the closest approximation. I defined PKT_TX_TCP_SEG, l4_len, mss = tso_segsz Using mss could be misinterpreted. I think tso_segsz much better describes this field meaning. I completely agree that the pseudo header checksum could be computed outside driver and I also followed this assumption. Mirek > -- > Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <7C4248CAE043B144B1CD242D275626532FDE0709-kPTMFJFq+rGvNW/NfzhIbrfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org>]
* Re: [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO (Transmit Segmentation Offload) [not found] ` <7C4248CAE043B144B1CD242D275626532FDE0709-kPTMFJFq+rGvNW/NfzhIbrfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> @ 2014-10-20 13:51 ` Thomas Monjalon 2014-10-20 14:03 ` Walukiewicz, Miroslaw 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2014-10-20 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Walukiewicz, Miroslaw; +Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw 2014-10-20 12:45, Walukiewicz, Miroslaw: > > > /* fields to support TX offloads */ > > > - union { > > > - uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 lengths as single var > > */ > > > - struct { > > > - uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header Length. */ > > > - uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header Length. > > */ > > > + /* two bytes - l2/l3 len for compatibility (endian issues) > > > + * two bytes - reseved for alignment > > > + * two bytes - l4 len (TCP/UDP) header len > > > + * two bytes - TCP tso segment size > > > + */ > > > + struct { > > > + union { > > > + uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 len */ > > > + struct { > > > + uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header */ > > > + uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header */ > > > + }; > > > }; > > > > Why nesting these fields in an anonymous structure? > > I want to keep a source compatibility with non-TSO applications using that > field for example IP checksum computing by NIC. > Keeping this structure anonymous I do not require changes in old > applications that do not need TSO support. > > The second argument is that in original patch extending the rte_mbuf to 128 > bytes made by Bruce the author made this structure anonymous and I follow > this assumption too. Excuse me, maybe I missed something, but I still don't understand why you are embedding the union into a struct? -- Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO (Transmit Segmentation Offload) 2014-10-20 13:51 ` Thomas Monjalon @ 2014-10-20 14:03 ` Walukiewicz, Miroslaw 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Walukiewicz, Miroslaw @ 2014-10-20 14:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon-pdR9zngts4EAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org] > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 3:51 PM > To: Walukiewicz, Miroslaw > Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO > (Transmit Segmentation Offload) > > 2014-10-20 12:45, Walukiewicz, Miroslaw: > > > > /* fields to support TX offloads */ > > > > - union { > > > > - uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 lengths as single var > > > */ > > > > - struct { > > > > - uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header Length. */ > > > > - uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header Length. > > > */ > > > > + /* two bytes - l2/l3 len for compatibility (endian issues) > > > > + * two bytes - reseved for alignment > > > > + * two bytes - l4 len (TCP/UDP) header len > > > > + * two bytes - TCP tso segment size > > > > + */ > > > > + struct { > > > > + union { > > > > + uint16_t l2_l3_len; /**< combined l2/l3 len */ > > > > + struct { > > > > + uint16_t l3_len:9; /**< L3 (IP) Header */ > > > > + uint16_t l2_len:7; /**< L2 (MAC) Header */ > > > > + }; > > > > }; > > > > > > Why nesting these fields in an anonymous structure? > > > > I want to keep a source compatibility with non-TSO applications using that > > field for example IP checksum computing by NIC. > > Keeping this structure anonymous I do not require changes in old > > applications that do not need TSO support. > > > > The second argument is that in original patch extending the rte_mbuf to > 128 > > bytes made by Bruce the author made this structure anonymous and I > follow > > this assumption too. > > Excuse me, maybe I missed something, but I still don't understand why you > are > embedding the union into a struct? You are right. It has no sense. Let me send a new version of the patch with new structure definition and better description > > -- > Thomas ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-10-20 14:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-10-20  9:42 [PATCH] pmd: Add generic support for TCP TSO (Transmit Segmentation Offload) miroslaw.walukiewicz-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w
     [not found] ` <20141020094252.14456.58891.stgit-tpi2AMbES9qir5R1eWH9hGt3HXsI98Cx0E9HWUfgJXw@public.gmane.org>
2014-10-20 11:30   ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-20 12:45     ` Walukiewicz, Miroslaw
     [not found]       ` <7C4248CAE043B144B1CD242D275626532FDE0709-kPTMFJFq+rGvNW/NfzhIbrfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org>
2014-10-20 13:51         ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-20 14:03           ` Walukiewicz, Miroslaw
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).