From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12] examples/l3fwd: add option to parse
	ptype
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 09:44:38 +0000
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AE2F0C@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1451544799-70776-1-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
 <1451544799-70776-13-git-send-email-jianfeng.tan@intel.com>
 <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AE1333@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <ED26CBA2FAD1BF48A8719AEF02201E36031CD0E5@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836AE18CF@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <568DBD4D.3000207@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: "Tan, Jianfeng" <jianfeng.tan@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D632695AC
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu,  7 Jan 2016 10:44:43 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <568DBD4D.3000207@intel.com>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

Hi Jianfeng,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tan, Jianfeng
> Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 1:20 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Zhang, Helin
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12] examples/l3fwd: add option to parse ptype
>=20
>=20
> Hi Konstantin,
>=20
> On 1/6/2016 12:49 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > Hi Jianfeng,
> >
> >>>> +static int
> >>>> +check_packet_type_ok(int portid)
> >>>> +{
> >>>> +	int i;
> >>>> +	int ret;
> >>>> +	uint32_t ptypes[RTE_PTYPE_L3_MAX_NUM];
> >>>> +	int ptype_l3_ipv4 =3D 0, ptype_l3_ipv6 =3D 0;
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	ret =3D rte_eth_dev_get_ptype_info(portid, RTE_PTYPE_L3_MASK,
> >>> ptypes);
> >>>> +	for (i =3D 0; i < ret; ++i) {
> >>>> +		if (ptypes[i] & RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4)
> >>>> +			ptype_l3_ipv4 =3D 1;
> >>>> +		if (ptypes[i] & RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6)
> >>>> +			ptype_l3_ipv6 =3D 1;
> >>>> +	}
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	if (ptype_l3_ipv4 =3D=3D 0)
> >>>> +		printf("port %d cannot parse RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV4\n", portid);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	if (ptype_l3_ipv6 =3D=3D 0)
> >>>> +		printf("port %d cannot parse RTE_PTYPE_L3_IPV6\n", portid);
> >>>> +
> >>>> +	if (ptype_l3_ipv4 || ptype_l3_ipv6)
> >>>> +		return 1;
> >
> > Forgot one thing: I think it should be:
> >
> > if (ptype_l3_ipv4 && ptype_l3_ipv6)
> >    return 1;
> > return 0;
> >
> > or just:
> >
> > return ptype_l3_ipv4 && ptype_l3_ipv6;
>=20
> My original thought is: PMDs, like vmxnet3, fills ptype_l3_ipv4, but not
> ptype_l3_ipv6.
> If we use "&&", then it would add rx callback to parse ptype whether
> ipv4 or ipv6 traffic is comming.

Yes, I think that's how it should be:
If HW can't recognise either IPV4 or IPV6 packets, then SW parsing needs to=
 be done.
l3fwd relies on PMD to recognise both IPV4 and IPV6 packets properly.
If it can recognise only IPV4, then IPV6 traffic will not be forwarded corr=
ectly,
and visa-versa. =20
Konstantin

>=20
> Thanks,
> Jianfeng
>=20
> >
> > Konstantin