> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wu, Wenjun1 <wenjun1...@intel.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 3:28 PM
> To: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>; Yigit, Ferruh
> <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>; Yang, Qiming
> <qiming.y...@intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] net/ice: revert removing IPID from default
> hash field
>
> Default RSS for outer src/dst IP address field in iavf is not supported
> before, so
> it does not cause any error.
> However, if it can be dropped, I suggest to do so. It seems to be safer to add
> IPID field here.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David Marchand <david.march...@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 3:10 PM
> > To: Wu, Wenjun1 <wenjun1...@intel.com>; Yigit, Ferruh
> > <ferruh.yi...@intel.com>
> > Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Yang, Qiming <qiming.y...@intel.com>; Zhang,
> > Qi Z <qi.z.zh...@intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] net/ice: revert removing IPID from
> > default hash field
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 9:05 AM Wenjun Wu <wenjun1...@intel.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > We try to refine default RSS for IP fragment packets. However, the
> > > change will lead to more serious errors. The scenario that there is
> > > overlap/conflict between the new characteristics and the existing
> > > ones has not been supported, so non-fragment packets and fragment
> > > packets cannot share the same hash fields, or all related profiles
> > > will be removed.
> > >
> > > Therefore, IPID field is necessary for fragment packets.
> > >
> > > Fixes: cf37e1e5e9d2 ("net/ice: fix default RSS hash for IP fragment
> > > packets")
The original fix has no issue, there should be a fix for the real problem, this
patch can be rejected after sync with author.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Wenjun Wu <wenjun1...@intel.com>
> >
> > - If this is a revert of cf37e1e5e9d2, maybe it is simpler to drop the
> > original change in next-net before it gets pulled in the main repo.
> > - A similar change has been applied to net/iavf? Is it still relevant?
> >
> >
> > --
> > David Marchand
>
