From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BACB714EC for ; Thu, 11 May 2017 01:17:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F9DF20963; Wed, 10 May 2017 19:17:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 10 May 2017 19:17:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=IyRBtjOkiTctN3j or3l5oFGWOqLM2tC7ieh9bzDyCJE=; b=rd2n2YMn80tXf32VfiqdQi77sUBfmmz K6Pbeqyj9jwtTnxjL9XztQHmjC8ZXadgk9WJ+gKmPc00Kuuh5BOfzzFCA/1za77I NVHPwqhAV/RDmMqhjGjCnz7C2rBxisIu9btfJGSbqXADSAGfUnpVRobOPjGnGjab QoqxhzeBql1I= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=IyRBtjOkiTctN3jor3l5oFGWOqLM2tC7ieh9bzDyCJE=; b=Ao3p7kCD rUS742OX5Jo/3tWV+g50c+F7TfGd28yNwVxzeuP8BVDs9lK1E3R8BGp8eub5V4NR z4s3IuIrX8wepo5OnSNqnV+bX8XBKO+WAyJOoIhip/hcG1NzF9NFq6RH26sZVwT5 zOf02WBesVxQRJgEo9jes+BSLrl7oV+7VKm0UF5sQyAk3Nna8Yv7uCmFlG1ZzNbM qw3DnEYCSjay0b+khAIzp2y6xnFwEhb8EyJVcZIK0TYD7W4eDTfhiQj0cgDR8D0h kcKeg8kP9QIvdf/MAusQQ18KfyOK0owDNN7FAsDO0pS3VzO5T+sOsZDffuEBCCo/ M7t46IdtQDpj7A== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: DkNRC0iKYrpQm+Zzs0DMWUnbb4fDWPOZSS+y+dsX7pQy 1494458243 Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D95FE7E8C4; Wed, 10 May 2017 19:17:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Shahaf Shuler Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Jerin Jacob , Adrien Mazarguil , Konstantin Ananyev , Olivier Matz , Tomasz Kulasek Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 01:17:23 +0200 Message-ID: <4458150.6A1vq6VJAK@xps> In-Reply-To: <20170509170412.GA14727@jerin> References: <20170501065812.5185-1-shahafs@mellanox.com> <20170509134004.GO16218@6wind.com> <20170509170412.GA14727@jerin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce ABI change on ethdev 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: Wed, 10 May 2017 23:17:25 -0000 > > > This is an ABI change notice for DPDK 17.08 in librte_ether > > > about changes in rte_eth_txmode structure. > > > > > > Currently Tx offloads are enabled by default, and can be disabled > > > using ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_NO* flags. This behaviour is not consistent with > > > the Rx side where the Rx offloads are disabled by default and enabled > > > according to bit field in rte_eth_rxmode structure. > > > > > > The proposal is to disable the Tx offloads by default, and provide > > > a way for the application to enable them in rte_eth_txmode structure. > > > Besides of making the Tx configuration API more consistent for > > > applications, PMDs will be able to provide a better out of the > > > box performance. > > > Finally, as part of the work, the ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_NO* will > > > be superseded as well. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Shahaf Shuler > > > > Basically, TX mbuf flags like TSO and checksum offloads won't have to be > > honored by PMDs unless applications request them first while configuring the > > device, just like RX offloads. > > > > Considering more and more TX offloads will be added over time, I do not > > think expecting them all to be enabled by default is sane. There will always > > be an associated software cost in PMDs, and this solution allows > > applications to selectively enable them as needed for maximum performance. > > > > Konstantin/Olivier/Tomasz, I do not want to resume the thread about > > tx_prepare(), however this could provide an alternative means to benefit > > from improved performance when applications do not need TSO (or any other > > offload for that matter), while adding consistency to device configuration. > > > > What's your opinion? > > > > In any case I'm fine with this change: > > > > Acked-by: Adrien Mazarguil > > Acked-by: Jerin Jacob Applied, thanks