Hi Helin, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2014 11:07 AM > To: Olivier MATZ; dev at dpdk.org > Cc: jigsaw at gmail.com; Zhang, Helin > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 06/13] mbuf: add functions to get the name > of an ol_flag > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2014 9:30 AM > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev at dpdk.org > > Cc: jigsaw at gmail.com; Zhang, Helin > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 06/13] mbuf: add functions to get the > > name of an ol_flag > > > > 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. > > Tend to agree... > Or probably collapse these 4 flags into one: flag PKT_RX_ERR or something. > Might be still used by someone for debugging purposes. > Helin, what do you think?
As there is no answer, I suppose you don't care these flags any more. So we can just remove them, right? Konstantin > > > > > 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
