08/11/2019 20:28, Kevin Traynor:
> Hi Xiao,
>
> On 29/10/2019 05:12, Xiao Zhang wrote:
> > VLAN packets with ip length bigger than 1496 will not be received by
> > i40e/i40evf due to wrong packets size checking. This patch fixes the
> > issue by correcting the maximum frame size during checking.
> >
> > Fixes: 43e5488c0ac6 ("net/i40e: support MTU configuration")
> > Cc: sta...@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xiao Zhang <xiao.zh...@intel.com>
> > ---
> > v3
> > Checking more places using max packet len.
> > v2
> > Add fix for i40evf and correct the checking when using the max_pkt_len.
> > ---
> > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_ethdev_vf.c | 11 +++++++----
> > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_fdir.c | 2 +-
> > drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx.c | 9 ++++++---
> > lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c | 10 ++++++++--
> > lib/librte_net/rte_ether.h | 1 +
> > 6 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> > +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> > @@ -1257,11 +1257,17 @@ rte_eth_dev_configure(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t
> > nb_rx_q, uint16_t nb_tx_q,
> > goto rollback;
> > }
> > } else {
> > + /**
> > + * The overhead from MTU to max frame size.
> > + * Considering VLAN and QinQ packet, the VLAN tag size
> > + * needs to be added to RTE_ETHER_MAX_LEN.
> > + */
> > if (dev_conf->rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len < RTE_ETHER_MIN_LEN ||
> > - dev_conf->rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len > RTE_ETHER_MAX_LEN)
> > + dev_conf->rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len > RTE_ETHER_MAX_LEN
> > + + RTE_ETHER_VLAN_LEN * 2)
> > /* Use default value */
> > dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.max_rx_pkt_len =
> > - RTE_ETHER_MAX_LEN;
> > + RTE_ETHER_MAX_LEN + RTE_ETHER_VLAN_LEN * 2;
>
> +cc ethdev maintainers
>
> This looks ok to me for i40e case, but I don't know if there is a
> consequence for other PMDs. It seems late to change this, so maybe you
> can live without this part for now.
>
> Even on the i40e parts, there can be some subtle bug and I requested
> i40e maintainers to review carefully but it has not happened, so for me
> it shouldn't be merged at present.
I would nack for another, simpler, reason:
No ethdev behaviour change should be submitted if title does not start
with "ethdev:" and if ethdev maintainers are not Cc'ed.
