From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier MATZ Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] i40e VXLAN TX checksum rework Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2014 10:26:55 +0100 Message-ID: <54783FDF.4090006@6wind.com> References: <1417076319-629-1-git-send-email-jijiang.liu@intel.com> <5476F28F.7010802@6wind.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213BADE4@IRSMSX105.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Liu, Jijiang" , "dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB977258213BADE4-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 11/27/2014 04:29 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote: >> As I suggested in the TSO thread, I think the following semantics >> is easier to understand for the user: >> >> - PKT_TX_IP_CKSUM: tell the NIC to compute IP cksum >> >> - PKT_TX_IPV4: tell the NIC it's an IPv4 packet. Required for L4 >> checksum offload or TSO. >> >> - PKT_TX_IPV6: tell the NIC it's an IPv6 packet. Required for L4 >> checksum offload or TSO. >> >> I think it won't make a big difference in the FVL driver. > > No, no big difference here, but I still think it will be a bit cleaner if all 3 flags would be nutually exclusive. > In fact, we can unite all 3 of them them into 2 bits, same as we doing for L4 checksum flags. In case of TSO, you need to set the PKT_TX_IPV4 flag. But as suggested by Yong Wang from Vmware [1], the vmxnet3 driver could support TSO without offloading IP checksum, so I think it's better to have flags for (is_ipv4 or is_ipv6), and another one to ask the ip_checksum. > You mean a new DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_* value, right? > Something like: DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TUNNEL? > And make i40e_dev_info_get() to return it? > Yes, forgot about it, sounds like a proper thing to do. Yes. I've seen that Jijiang is planning to add it in a future bug fix patch. That's fine to me. [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-November/007775.html Regards, Olivier