On 26 November 2014 at 19:12, Bill Fischofer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Running under Linux these tests are redundant since the OS takes care of > it. On SoCs the I/O HW will normally flag runt packets anyway so again > this is unnecessary. It will be deleted along with the parser changes > needed for the new packet APIs. An intermediate patch is fine but would be > short lived since that routine is scheduled for replacement anyway. > > Bill > > > Practice shows that good immediate patches that fix current problem is useful since replacement patches can delay for long time due to number of various reasons... Can we have Review-by for that patch? Maxim. > On Wednesday, November 26, 2014, Ciprian Barbu <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Ola Liljedahl >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I think this check is too strict and should be removed. >> > >> > I remember we had a discussion about this many months ago and already >> > then I was of the opinion that this check is unnecessary and not very >> > beneficial. >> > >> > The 64-byte limit originates from Ethernet *link* restrictions and >> > doesn't have anything to do with parsing packets. We want to be able >> > to use virtual interfaces even in production systems, they are >> > actually some very good reasons for that. >> >> There was a long discussion on this topic on end of April, there are >> no archives for that it seems. I found this post which contains some >> snippets: >> http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/lng-odp/2014-April/000024.html >> >> But the conclusion of that discussion was that Petri wanted to have >> ODP work with Ethernet cards only, no WiFi (which also generate frames >> shorter than 60/64) and no other software originated packets. That's >> why the restrictions was kept in place and instead a bug was opened >> saying that ODP cannot work with wireless network cards. >> >> With the addition of classification support in linux-generic this >> limitation should be revised IMO. >> >> /Ciprian >> >> > >> > -- Ola >> > >> > On 26 November 2014 at 09:41, Shmulik Ladkani < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 15:04:53 -0600 Bill Fischofer < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> These functions are scheduled for rework as part of the packet API >> >>> revisions. Will be sure to address this point as part of that rework. >> >> >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> >> If there's a concensus the 'len < ODPH_ETH_LEN_MIN' is too strict, any >> >> reason not to submit a tiny patch that removes this sanity test? >> >> >> >> This could be beneficial, as your patchset would therefore not >> >> carry this logical change, but instead focus on packet API changes. >> >> >> >> Regards, >> >> Shmulik >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> lng-odp mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > lng-odp mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >> >> _______________________________________________ >> lng-odp mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp >> > > _______________________________________________ > lng-odp mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp > >
_______________________________________________ lng-odp mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/lng-odp
