From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2A1BA0566; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:23:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50F4D42D21; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:23:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 589A9400EF; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:23:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B96B5C019E; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 10:23:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 21 Nov 2022 10:23:24 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1669044204; x= 1669130604; bh=Kv+ZnNbqHVm5S0wT4bVOfP59SxTxRr3Yblr6Oca3rsI=; b=S CZfct1u98RGjVjQKPSRbftScIHm6Did9NXR2PAhlNLAhN9j9w37ZdWOoN4srfEbS Q9jvwsJ1ymzAmMleIMJ1LCJzmRMNwU1ak+LHPi8qATURZSZZtasvzS3veYcUoMlQ Fqu7MRHbtOkbrr+Zk8W2wE4CI/GWjcTeTqxQRKnlxTovNEWeTZ1yD7pYZknXzuWa 0yIvhMXWI/7xFibAZ4SoaLrqcASxkplGb2S5zMZojuKDEq7jPzS8IAQlNeyTC5Q4 niKYGFWTWj2CUwt+YMDF2Jb9h1dwZUcer1YSOR5CYYVmV6AxBu2JJ9MEW7pXNppK qAY2k4/xT0EBt3MD9DY2Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t=1669044204; x= 1669130604; bh=Kv+ZnNbqHVm5S0wT4bVOfP59SxTxRr3Yblr6Oca3rsI=; b=B PskLV5VaUoBclvFRKH9XptHbJ5VoQZr9iAZrAUfzn/DLGsT6j9blIcqh/qDVJQ7m zY5Y+AvPoVVezTqm3ls6nFwIoY79WFZX9ocbSiReHXjrwEHIcXKfz6yq0n1PpM7n eO+brgJhzjh1S0EwGqZPZFBu9XZwYWZLE29QVspYFzyRHpWOPpRg3z1ybef2bMT4 7wmweOYNtrCOtYWUEkwnW6LTZBOFaRyIH8GHI80PLwLLEna9XFR/2hFVqcXODQU9 FeH4/z4PboB+wM6DHC9t/76h4X0Q/Ax83YaPAnmlOEm4e9i+6xgDGg+vCU3FmMYK +6wuCRlmI7HTLRr2J30Wg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvgedrheeigdejhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgfdvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddtieek gfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrh homhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 21 Nov 2022 10:23:23 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: getelson@nvidia.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org, matan@nvidia.com, rasland@nvidia.com, Viacheslav Ovsiienko Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc: update MLX5 LRO limitation Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:23:21 +0100 Message-ID: <5620946.DvuYhMxLoT@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20221117143901.27957-2-getelson@nvidia.com> References: <20221117143901.27957-1-getelson@nvidia.com> <20221117143901.27957-2-getelson@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 17/11/2022 15:39, Gregory Etelson: > Maximal LRO message size must be multiply of 256. > Otherwise, TCP payload may not fit into a single WQE. > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson > Acked-by: Matan Azrad Why the doc update is not in the same patch as the code change? > @@ -278,6 +278,9 @@ Limitations > - No Tx metadata go to the E-Switch steering domain for the Flow group 0. > The flows within group 0 and set metadata action are rejected by hardware. > > +- The driver rounds down the ``max_lro_pkt_size`` value in the port > + configuration to a multiple of 256 due to HW limitation. > + > .. note:: > > MAC addresses not already present in the bridge table of the associated If you would like to read the doc, I guess you'd prefer to find this info in the section dedicated to LRO, not in a random place.