From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] examples/l3fwd: force CRC stripping for
	i40evf
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 11:22:27 +0100
Message-ID: <5303716.ypxckaOVgo@xps13>
References: <20161109082341.19825-1-bjorn.topel@intel.com>
 <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0D2F6C@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <5ad83b54-f13b-787e-c056-958f5cb8bd61@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 helin.zhang@intel.com, "Xu, Qian Q" <qian.q.xu@intel.com>, "Yao,
 Lei A" <lei.a.yao@intel.com>, "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_T=F6pel?= <bjorn.topel@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBB612BC7
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed,  9 Nov 2016 11:22:29 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id p190so298555915wmp.1
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 09 Nov 2016 02:22:29 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5ad83b54-f13b-787e-c056-958f5cb8bd61@intel.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>

2016-11-09 11:05, Bj=F6rn T=F6pel:
>  > BTW, all other examples would experience same problem too, right?
>=20
> Correct, so the broader question would be "what is the correct behavi=
or=20
> for an example application, when a port configuration isn't supported=
 by=20
> the hardware?".
>=20
> My stand, FWIW, is that igb and ixgbe should have the same semantics =
as
> i40e currently has, i.e. return an error to the user if the port is
> mis-configured, NOT changing the setting behind the users back.

Yes it sounds sane.