Hi Konstantin, > -----Original Message----- > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > Sent: Monday, March 13, 2017 3:06 AM > To: Singh, Jasvinder <jasvinder.si...@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Cc: Doherty, Declan <declan.dohe...@intel.com>; De Lara Guarch, Pablo > <pablo.de.lara.gua...@intel.com> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] librte_net: add crc compute APIs > > Hi Jasvinder, > > > > > APIs for selecting the architecure specific implementation and > > computing the crc (16-bit and 32-bit CRCs) are added. For CRCs > > calculation, scalar as well as x86 intrinsic(sse4.2) versions are > > implemented. > > > > The scalar version is based on generic Look-Up Table(LUT) algorithm, > > while x86 intrinsic version uses carry-less multiplication for fast > > CRC computation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jasvinder Singh <jasvinder.si...@intel.com> > > --- > > lib/librte_net/Makefile | 3 + > > lib/librte_net/rte_net_crc.c | 205 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > lib/librte_net/rte_net_crc.h | 104 +++++++++++ > > lib/librte_net/rte_net_crc_sse.h | 351 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > lib/librte_net/rte_net_version.map | 8 + > > 5 files changed, 671 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 lib/librte_net/rte_net_crc.c create mode 100644 > > lib/librte_net/rte_net_crc.h create mode 100644 > > lib/librte_net/rte_net_crc_sse.h > > > > + > > +/** > > + * CRC compute API > > + * > > + * @param mbuf > > + * Pointer to the packet mbuf for crc computation > > + * @param data_offset > > + * Offset to the data in the mbuf > > + * @param data_len > > + * length of the data to compute the crc on > > + * @param type > > + * crc type > > + * > > + * @return > > + * computed crc value > > + */ > > +uint32_t > > +rte_net_crc_calc(struct rte_mbuf *mbuf, > > + uint32_t data_offset, > > + uint32_t data_len, > > + enum rte_net_crc_type type); > > > I think it will probably be convenient to have this API not dependent on > mbuf, something like: > > uint32_t rte_net_crc_calc(const void *buf, uint32_t data_len, enum > rte_net_crc_type type); > > And if we like to have an extra function that would do similar thing for mbuf, > that's fine too, but I suppose such function would have to handle multi- > segment case too. > Konstantin
I will change the api as you suggested. Thanks.
