[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/4] ethdev: fix max Rx packet length
Ferruh Yigit
ferruh.yigit at intel.com
Thu Jul 22 12:27:19 CEST 2021
On 7/22/2021 2:31 AM, Ajit Khaparde wrote:
>
>
>
> > [snip]
> >
> >> diff --git a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> >> index faf3bd901d75..9f288f98329c 100644
> >> --- a/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> >> +++ b/lib/ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> >> @@ -410,7 +410,7 @@ enum rte_eth_tx_mq_mode {
> >> struct rte_eth_rxmode {
> >> /** The multi-queue packet distribution mode to be used, e.g. RSS. */
> >> enum rte_eth_rx_mq_mode mq_mode;
> >> - uint32_t max_rx_pkt_len; /**< Only used if JUMBO_FRAME enabled. */
> >> + uint32_t mtu; /**< Requested MTU. */
> >
> > Maximum Transmit Unit looks a bit confusing in Rx mode
> > structure.
> >
>
> True, but I think it is already used for Rx already as concept, I believe the
> intention will be clear enough. Do you think will be more clear if we pick a
> DPDK specific variable name?
>
> Maybe use MRU - Max Receive Unit.
>
It can be an option, but this patch unifies 'max_rx_pkt_len' & 'mtu' => mtu,
if we switch to 'mru', we should switch all usage to 'mru', including
'rte_eth_dev_set_mtu()' API name change, to not cause a new confusion between
'mru' & 'mtu' difference.
Does 'mtu' really cause this much confusion to do all this change?
>
> >> /** Maximum allowed size of LRO aggregated packet. */
> >> uint32_t max_lro_pkt_size;
> >> uint16_t split_hdr_size; /**< hdr buf size (header_split enabled).*/
> >
> > [snip]
> >
>
More information about the dev
mailing list