Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 8:34 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Liu, Jijiang; Zhang, Helin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksu
Hi Konstantin,
On 01/26/2015 03:15 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
Another thing - IPIP seems to work ok by HW.
There is something wrong on our (PMD/test-pmd) side.
I think at least we have to remove the following check:
if (!l2_len) {
PMD_DRV_LOG(DEBUG, "L
Hi,
On 01/26/2015 07:02 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
>> I tried to repeat Olivier test-cases on my box.
>> Though, I didn't use test-pmd cusmonly and i40ePMD logic, but filled TCD and
>> TDD mostly from hardcoded values.
>> That's what I got:
>>
>> 4 input packets:
>> a) ETHER/IPv4/UDP/VXLAN/ETHER/IP
Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 2:07 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; Ananyev, Konstantin; Zhang, Helin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksu
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2015 12:14 PM
> To: Olivier MATZ; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> csum forwarding engine
>
> Hi
Hi lads,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 3:25 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; Ananyev, Konstantin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:stephen at networkplumber.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 3:45 AM
> To: Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: Olivier MATZ; Ananyev, Konstantin; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum
Hi Konstantin,
On 01/21/2015 05:28 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>> I added the support of Ether over GRE, IP over GRE and IP over IP
>> tunnels in csumonly to do the test. I ask the csum forward engine
>> to calculate inner IP+TCP checksums, and outer IP (case 6 in [1]).
>> Here are the results:
Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 3:25 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; Ananyev, Konstantin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
Hi,
On 01/21/2015 04:12 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
> Ok, and why it should be our problem?
> We have a lot of things done in a different manner then
> linux/freebsd kernel drivers, Why now it became a problem?
If linux doesn't need an equivalent flag for doing the same thing, it
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 9:11 AM
> To: Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum
&
On Wed, 21 Jan 2015 03:12:35 +
"Liu, Jijiang" wrote:
> > Because the dpdk looks very similar to that part of linux driver.
>
> A guy from Intel who have already confirmed that the NVGRE is not supported
> yet in Linux kernel.
>
> He said "So far as I know it is not yet supported and
Hi Jijiang,
On 01/21/2015 09:01 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
>>> I still don't understand why you are so eager to 'forbid' it.
>>> Yes we support it for FVL, but no one forces you to use it.
>>
>> Well, how would you describe this 2 ways of doing the same thing in the
>> offload API? Would you talk abo
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 2:16 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> c
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 2:16 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> c
Hi Konstantin,
On 01/20/2015 06:23 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>> Sure, it does not make a big difference in terms of code. But
>> in terms of API, the naming of the flag is coherent to what it is
>> used for. And it's easier to find a simple definition, like:
>>
>>* Packet is IPv4. This fl
Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 12:39 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
2015-01-20 13:39, Olivier MATZ:
> On 01/20/2015 02:12 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >> So I will fix that in my coming patch series. Just for information,
> >> I'm pretty sure that having PKT_TX_IPV4 and PKT_TX_IP_CSUM as not
> >> exclusive flag would not require any change anywhere in the PMDs
Hi,
On 01/20/2015 02:12 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
I think a good definition would
be:
Packet is IPv4. This flag must be set when using any offload
feature (TSO, L3 or L4 checksum) to tell the NIC that the packet
is an IPv4 packet.
Th
On Tue, 20 Jan 2015 16:18:01 +0100
Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2015-01-20 13:39, Olivier MATZ:
> > On 01/20/2015 02:12 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > >> So I will fix that in my coming patch series. Just for information,
> > >> I'm pretty sure that having PKT_TX_IPV4 and PKT_TX_IP_CSUM as not
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2015 2:39 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum
> forw
Hi Konstantin,
On 01/19/2015 02:04 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>> case 2) calculate checksum of out_ip and out_udp
>>
>>mb->l2_len = len(out_eth)
>>mb->l3_len = len(out_ip)
>>mb->ol_flags |= PKT_TX_IPV4 | PKT_TX_IP_CSUM | PKT_TX_UDP_CKSUM
>>set out_ip checksum to 0 in the packet
Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 5:28 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
Hi Konstantin, Hi Jijiang,
On 01/15/2015 02:31 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> To be honest, there are so many mails around that subject, so I am already
> lost :)
> Oliver, as I understand you are not happy with the test-pmd commands Frank is
> proposing.
> Both syntax and semantics.
> Is that
Hi lads,
> -Original Message-
> From: Liu, Jijiang
> Sent: Wednesday, January 14, 2015 3:01 AM
> To: Olivier MATZ
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum
> forwarding e
Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2015 5:56 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
Hi Jijiang,
On 01/13/2015 04:04 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
> the following two commands are.
>
> 1. tx_checksum set sw-tunnel-mode on/off
>
> 2. tx_checksum set hw-tunnel-mode on/off
>
> For command 1, If the sw-tunnel-mode is set/clear, which will set/clear a
> testpmd flag that is used in the proc
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Monday, January 12, 2015 7:43 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; Ananyev, Konstantin
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> csum forw
Hi Jijiang,
Please find some comments below.
On 01/12/2015 04:41 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
> There are some examples for the different packet types:
>
> 1. For L2 Packet types:
> MAC, ARP
> MAC, PAY2
> ...
> They are forwarded without beeing modified no matter if these above commands
> are set.
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 9, 2015 6:45 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> csum forw
Hi,
Thank you Jijiang for taking the time to get back on this.
On 01/08/2015 11:54 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>> And we are able to test all of cases in
>> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-December/009213.html
>>
>> Test case A:
>>
>> tx_checksum set sw-tunnel-mode off
>> tx_checksum se
Hi Frank,
> -Original Message-
> From: Liu, Jijiang
> Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 8:52 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; 'Olivier MATZ'
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum
> forwarding engin
Hi,
> -Original Message-
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2015 8:07 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; 'Olivier MATZ'
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> csum forwarding engine
>
On 12/10/2014 9:04 AM, Jijiang Liu wrote:
> In the current codes, the "tx_checksum set (ip|udp|tcp|sctp|vxlan) (hw|sw)
> (port-id)" command is not easy to understand and extend, so the patch set
> enhances the tx_checksum command and reworks csum forwarding engine due to
> the change of tx_check
> -Original Message-
> From: Liu, Jijiang
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 11:39 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; 'Olivier MATZ'
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and csum
> forwa
Hi Konstantin,
> -Original Message-
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Wednesday, January 7, 2015 5:59 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; 'Olivier MATZ'
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> csum
Hi Frank,
> -Original Message-
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Liu, Jijiang
> Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 2:04 AM
> To: 'Olivier MATZ'
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command a
Hi Olivier,
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2014 12:33 AM
> To: Liu, Jijiang
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
> csum forwar
Hello,
On 12/12/2014 04:48 AM, Liu, Jijiang wrote:
> The 'hw/sw' option is used to set/clear the flag of enabling TX tunneling
> packet checksum hardware offload in testpmd application.
This is not clear at all.
In your command, there is (hw|sw|none).
Are you talking about inner or outer?
Is th
Hi Olivier,
Thanks for your comments.
> -Original Message-
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz at 6wind.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2014 6:18 PM
> To: Liu, Jijiang; dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] enhance TX checksum command and
&g
Hi Jijiang,
Sorry for the late review, I was very busy these last days. Please find
my comments below.
On 12/10/2014 02:03 AM, Jijiang Liu wrote:
> In the current codes, the "tx_checksum set (ip|udp|tcp|sctp|vxlan) (hw|sw)
> (port-id)" command is not easy to understand and extend, so the patch s
In the current codes, the "tx_checksum set (ip|udp|tcp|sctp|vxlan) (hw|sw)
(port-id)" command is not easy to understand and extend, so the patch set
enhances the tx_checksum command and reworks csum forwarding engine due to the
change of tx_checksum command.
The main changes of the tx_checksum
42 matches
Mail list logo
