[dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 00/11] ixgbe/mbuf: add TSO support

2014-05-19 Thread Thomas Monjalon
2014-05-09 16:50, Olivier Matz: > This series add TSO support in ixgbe DPDK driver. As discussed > previously on the list [1], one problem is that there is not enough room > in rte_mbuf today to store the required information to implement this > feature: > - a new ol_flag > - the MSS > - the

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 00/11] ixgbe/mbuf: add TSO support

2014-05-10 Thread Olivier MATZ
Hi Stephen, On 05/09/2014 07:04 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > I would also like to propose changing the checksum offload flags. > Many devices can indicate good checksum in some cases but can't test > for many other types of packets. By changing the flags to be: > PKT_RX_L4_CKSUM_GOOD and

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 00/11] ixgbe/mbuf: add TSO support

2014-05-09 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Fri, 09 May 2014 23:49:45 +0200 Olivier MATZ wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On 05/09/2014 07:04 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > I would also like to propose changing the checksum offload flags. > > Many devices can indicate good checksum in some cases but can't test > > for many other types of

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 00/11] ixgbe/mbuf: add TSO support

2014-05-09 Thread Olivier Matz
This series add TSO support in ixgbe DPDK driver. As discussed previously on the list [1], one problem is that there is not enough room in rte_mbuf today to store the required information to implement this feature: - a new ol_flag - the MSS - the L4 header len A solution would be to

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH RFC 00/11] ixgbe/mbuf: add TSO support

2014-05-09 Thread Stephen Hemminger
On Fri, 9 May 2014 16:50:27 +0200 Olivier Matz wrote: > This series add TSO support in ixgbe DPDK driver. As discussed > previously on the list [1], one problem is that there is not enough room > in rte_mbuf today to store the required information to implement this > feature: > - a new