[dpdk-dev] Loop back mode of the KNI
Zhang, Helin
helin.zhang at intel.com
Fri Jan 17 15:28:14 CET 2014
Hi Thomas
The final fix for that could be like below.
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/kni_net.c b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/kni_net.c
index 9a49111..12dbcc0 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/kni_net.c
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/kni/kni_net.c
@@ -311,7 +311,6 @@ kni_net_rx_lo_fifo_skb(struct kni_dev *kni)
skb_reserve(skb, 2);
memcpy(skb_put(skb, len), data_kva, len);
skb->dev = dev;
- skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, dev);
skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
dev_kfree_skb(skb);
}
@@ -327,7 +326,6 @@ kni_net_rx_lo_fifo_skb(struct kni_dev *kni)
skb_reserve(skb, 2);
memcpy(skb_put(skb, len), data_kva, len);
skb->dev = dev;
- skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, dev);
skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
kni->stats.rx_bytes += len;
Regards,
Helin
-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 7:20 PM
To: Daniel Kaminsky; Zhang, Helin
Cc: dev at dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Loop back mode of the KNI
> > From: Daniel Kaminsky
[...]
> > > But when running with *lo_mode=lo_mode_fifo_skb *the packets on
> > > the egress doesn't include the first 14 bytes (the ethernet
> > > header) although the packets size doesn't change.
> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 2:50 AM, Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang at intel.com> wrote:
[...]
> > Yes. That's a bug, and it will be fixed in later DPDK releases.
25/12/2013 07:57, Daniel Kaminsky:
[...]
> The "fix" below works for me but I don't think it's complete and
> correct for all kernels.
>
> --- src/kernel/fast_kni/kni_net.c
> +++ src/kernel/fast_kni/kni_net.c
> @@ -353,6 +353,12 @@
> kni->stats.rx_bytes += len;
> kni->stats.rx_packets++;
>
> + /* adjust the skb */
> + if (likely(skb_mac_header_was_set(skb))) {
> + skb->len += ETH_HLEN;
> + skb->data -= ETH_HLEN;
> + }
> +
> /* call tx interface */
> kni_net_tx(skb, dev);
> }
Thanks Daniel.
Please Helin, could you share the complete patch in case Daniel's one is not sufficient ?
--
Thomas
More information about the dev
mailing list