From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: "Kulasek, TomaszX" <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for rte_eth_dev structure
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 01:59:01 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2146153.nVzdynOqdk@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B80AD8@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Kulasek <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
> > ---
> > +* In 16.11 ABI changes are plained: the ``rte_eth_dev`` structure will be
> > + extended with new function pointer ``tx_pkt_prep`` allowing verification
> > + and processing of packet burst to meet HW specific requirements before
> > + transmit. Also new fields will be added to the ``rte_eth_desc_lim`` structure:
> > + ``nb_seg_max`` and ``nb_mtu_seg_max`` provideing information about number of
> > + segments limit to be transmitted by device for TSO/non-TSO packets.
>
> Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
I think I understand you want to split the TX processing:
1/ modify/write in mbufs
2/ write in HW
and let application decide:
- where the TX prep is done (which core)
- what to do if the TX prep fail
So adding some processing in this first part becomes "not too expensive" or
"manageable" from the application point of view.
If I well understand the intent,
Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
(except typos ;)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-27 8:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-20 14:24 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Tomasz Kulasek
2016-07-20 15:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-20 15:13 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-20 15:22 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-20 15:42 ` Kulasek, TomaszX
2016-07-21 15:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Tomasz Kulasek
2016-07-21 22:48 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-27 8:59 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2016-07-27 17:10 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-27 17:33 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-27 17:41 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-27 20:51 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28 2:13 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 10:36 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28 11:38 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 12:07 ` Avi Kivity
2016-07-28 13:01 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28 13:58 ` Olivier MATZ
2016-07-28 14:21 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28 13:59 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 14:52 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-28 16:25 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 17:07 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-31 7:50 ` Vlad Zolotarov
2016-07-28 12:04 ` Avi Kivity
2016-07-31 7:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Vlad Zolotarov
2016-07-31 8:10 ` Vlad Zolotarov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2146153.nVzdynOqdk@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).