[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 0/6] add Tx preparation

Ananyev, Konstantin konstantin.ananyev at intel.com
Wed Dec 7 11:22:35 CET 2016



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yuanhan Liu [mailto:yuanhan.liu at linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 7, 2016 10:19 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> Cc: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit at intel.com>; Olivier Matz <olivier.matz at 6wind.com>; Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon at 6wind.com>;
> dev at dpdk.org; Jan Medala <jan at semihalf.com>; Jakub Palider <jpa at semihalf.com>; Netanel Belgazal <netanel at amazon.com>; Evgeny
> Schemeilin <evgenys at amazon.com>; Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero at netronome.com>; Yong Wang <yongwang at vmware.com>;
> Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko at solarflare.com>; Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal at nxp.com>; Kulasek, TomaszX
> <tomaszx.kulasek at intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 0/6] add Tx preparation
> 
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2016 at 10:13:14AM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> >
> > Hi Yliu,
> >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 03:53:42PM +0000, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > > > > Please, we need a comment for each driver saying
> > > > > "it is OK, we do not need any checksum preparation for TSO"
> > > > > or
> > > > > "yes we have to implement tx_prepare or TSO will not work in this mode"
> > > > >
> > >
> > > Sorry for late. For virtio, I think it's not a must. The checksum stuff
> > > has been handled inside the Tx function. However, we may could move it
> > > to tx_prepare, which would actually recover the performance lost
> > > introduced while enabling TSO for the non-TSO case.
> > >
> >
> > So would you like to provide a patch for it,
> > Or would you like to keep tx_prepare() for virtio as NOP for now?
> 
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> I'd keep it as it is for now. It should be a trivial patch after all, that
> I could provide it when everything are settled down.

Ok, thanks for clarification.
Konstantin

> 
> 	--yliu


More information about the dev mailing list