> -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:43 AM > To: Xueming(Steven) Li <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Wenzhuo Lu <[email protected]>; Jingjing Wu > <[email protected]>; Yongseok Koh > <[email protected]>; Olivier MATZ <[email protected]>; Shahaf Shuler > <[email protected]>; > Ferruh Yigit <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: introduce generic IP/UDP > tunnel checksum and TSO > > 08/04/2018 14:32, Xueming Li: > > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h > > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h > > @@ -210,6 +210,8 @@ extern "C" { > > #define PKT_TX_TUNNEL_GENEVE (0x4ULL << 45) /**< TX packet with > > MPLS-in-UDP RFC 7510 header. */ #define PKT_TX_TUNNEL_MPLSINUDP > > (0x5ULL << 45) > > +#define PKT_TX_TUNNEL_IP (0xDULL << 45) /**< Tx IP tunneled packet. > > +*/ #define PKT_TX_TUNNEL_UDP (0xEULL << 45) /**< Tx UDP tunneled > > +packet. */ > > I think you need to explain in details, in the comments, what we can expect > when using these flags. > Please write the doxygen comment on the lines before the flag.
Got it. > > Any reason for using 0xD and 0xE values? > Because they are more generic than the first ones? Yes, do you think it better to continue with previous ones? > > > /* add new TX TUNNEL type here */ > > #define PKT_TX_TUNNEL_MASK (0xFULL << 45) > >
