Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] ethdev: add enum type for loop on Rx/Tx offloads

["Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>]

Hi Daiwei:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wei Dai
> Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 8:41 PM
> To: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing
> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Dai, Wei <wei.dai@intel.com>
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] ethdev: add enum type for loop on Rx/Tx
> offloads
> 
> This patch adds enum rte_eth_rx_offload_type and enum
> rte_eth_tx_offload_type. For a loop on all Rx offloads, it is convenient to
> begin with the first enum member ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE and to
> end at ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM.
> A loop on all Tx offloads can begin with ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE
> and end at ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Dai <wei.dai@intel.com>
> ---
>  lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h | 44
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> index 0361533..0089ea3 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> @@ -946,6 +946,27 @@ struct rte_eth_conf {
>  			     DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_FILTER | \
>  			     DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_EXTEND)
> 
> +enum rte_eth_rx_offload_type {
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE = 0,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_STRIP = ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_LRO,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_QINQ_STRIP,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_IPV4_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_MACSEC_STRIP,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_FILTER,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_EXTEND,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_CRC_STRIP,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TIMESTAMP,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY,
> +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM
> +};

This looks a little duplicate with rte_rx_offload_names in rte_ethdev.c

In patch 2/3 and 3/3, I think if you simply loop from offload bit 0 to bit 63 to check the name, that should still work right?
then this patch could be unnecessary.
	
Regards
Qi
> +
>  /*
>   * If new Rx offload capabilities are defined, they also must be
>   * mentioned in rte_rx_offload_names in rte_ethdev.c file.
> @@ -981,6 +1002,29 @@ struct rte_eth_conf {
>   */
>  #define DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY         0x00020000
> 
> +enum rte_eth_tx_offload_type {
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE = 0,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_INSERT = ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_SCTP_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_TSO,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TSO,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_IPV4_CKSUM,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_QINQ_INSERT,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MACSEC_INSERT,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MT_LOCKFREE,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MULTI_SEGS,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MBUF_FAST_FREE,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY,
> +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM
> +};
> +
>  /*
>   * If new Tx offload capabilities are defined, they also must be
>   * mentioned in rte_tx_offload_names in rte_ethdev.c file.
> --
> 2.7.5