[Open-FCoE] [PATCH] fcoe: use ETH_P_FIP for skb->protocol of FIPframes

Joe Eykholt jeykholt at cisco.com
Sat Apr 4 01:28:45 UTC 2009

Chris Leech wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 03, 2009 at 03:48:37PM -0700, Joe Eykholt wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: devel-bounces at open-fcoe.org<mailto:devel-bounces at open-fcoe.org>
>>> [mailto:devel-bounces at open-fcoe.org] On Behalf Of Chris Leech
>>> Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 3:21 PM
>>> To: devel at open-fcoe.org<mailto:devel at open-fcoe.org>
>>> Subject: [Open-FCoE] [PATCH] fcoe: use ETH_P_FIP for
>>> skb->protocol of FIPframes
>>> FIP frames should leave the fcoe layer with skb->protocol set
>>> to ETH_P_FIP, not ETH_P_802_3.
>> I think the reason 802_3 was set was to accommodate the tc command, to get
>> the right 803.1p tags.  Maybe that's been solved some other way by now.
>> How is skb->protocol used on output?
> For the FCoE offload support we wanted traffic set to ETH_P_FCOE so that
> a network driver could tell what type of frame it was without peeking
> into the header.  Other than that I think it's just a matter of correctness
> and matching what other protocols do.  With FCoE data traffic changed to
> using ETH_P_FCOE, it doesn't make sense to me to not have FIP using
> I was never really clear what the issue with the tc filters for DCB was,
> when I looked at it there didn't seem to be a problem with using the
> real ethertype.  That may have changed with the use of the skb_edit
> action to assign a transmit queue, if fcoeplumb was previously using a
> action to set the priority bits?
> - Chris

I don't remember either.  Maybe it was a much earlier version of tc that
had some limitation.

Thanks for fixing up fcoeplumb.  I was wondering if we should add a filter
to put FIP in the same queues.  FIP is less sensitive to drops, but maybe
we should do that anyway.  What do you think?


More information about the devel mailing list