From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wj0-f172.google.com (mail-wj0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6363510D59 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:30:40 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wj0-f172.google.com with SMTP id ez4so10419723wjd.0 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 05:30:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZMZuSSRrA3TImdW9arrzhMcC/AeON66wu/WpGyTmSlU=; b=QF/uAc05BysLaoBqxmD3S4gZwP0yhGvn0gBHkQKJAaDbycbBGeBzz7fyCX8B31TkXx qcJV76FqPPN5XGoASlS2cOvVKTe7q/faN47PyB3V4kGAL7xQ/rIiTlENCHIL5LGT0Goi Mrdi4WNaoVds6ZSKbv5qe4gtiZyJP0PrcmyX5ZbewpB3guerWuUqdqGbCmKM45cnROb0 9+/vJlnzJqYIfvtEL2EsxaH7ouCrrwOCRHHH2zRJZ+CQcttiqt2K8SF4UbYknsRwyxD0 o3xrYfyZuTf1Dj8PlA9GaVkNnHtPAi051cpyhFBhpbAMP7CG8DM8mn7c1meuDir04TMj YMNw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZMZuSSRrA3TImdW9arrzhMcC/AeON66wu/WpGyTmSlU=; b=I808QYoh+XA+VeH+N8fdzTcURgx0Y4b4/Lfc0oWFUEFmY6vrxyJhgmmqKM+6MjWZj2 Du7WDGvTH+QzNhzc+ByZw+tCwWFRxfpovJFXUNfqnkNpB9Jl+DaJ2FOTDf/WMa3P439D S3OPk2mwhqSixgURs+iF/Ik3EGuGeFwBtQszbBKPepX0SjyLU6pzaRFgGVra3OEmBW5k d0n1W0h9+lzdhSI8OdvOj9Jra/mVeeSi6DIDdS8w5Uy6E1iNaoxcFUpTtFLkG6RaCBok XuaY4uSuAtJjTbYkLcq5DRxZWRBIvNkcGTSjTXRCVk5itcVCMpE+GINhJDwlKglZc1bk n/MA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXJSiyrhKeAGF3zkDDjNY8eEu7reczuN4sceBAw4qqe1BK4G9+T3uwakoKmsl1X5mADS X-Received: by 10.194.145.83 with SMTP id ss19mr10235869wjb.67.1482413440073; Thu, 22 Dec 2016 05:30:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 14sm32283244wmk.1.2016.12.22.05.30.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 22 Dec 2016 05:30:39 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" Cc: "Kulasek, TomaszX" , Olivier Matz , dev@dpdk.org Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 14:30:38 +0100 Message-ID: <2376458.ueV7yndzPH@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E689E@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1477486575-25148-1-git-send-email-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com> <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A14F5A409@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772583F0E689E@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 13:30:40 -0000 2016-12-12 11:51, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > > The application gets few information from tx_prepare() about what should > > > be done to make the packet accepted by the hw, and the actions will > > > probably be different depending on hardware. > > That's true. > I am open to suggestions how in future to provide extra information to the upper layer. > Set rte_errno to different values depending on type of error, > OR extra parameter in tx_prepare() that will provide more detailed error information, > OR something else? That's one of the reason which give me a feeling that it is safer to introduce tx_prepare as an experimental API in 17.02. So the users will know that it can change in the next release. What do you think?