From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58CB9A0597; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:32:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3AB351EA05; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:32:07 +0200 (CEST) Received: from new1-smtp.messagingengine.com (new1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.221]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A65701E9D1 for ; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:32:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04B30580371; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:32:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:32:06 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=bfdnai7awvcKtRS1BGRi/d37MqTO7ALUR1txHt2/vy4=; b=nZVi/vx47WHe OVgdZTwqQp0uDet7OcGSW5ld1A+NYbLW0cKgtqkMgmYw9wb+h1RYnuutWxe05Igo Hgtj2r9pKq8Adv1/haIoHeGkyrqyYA6+2NAZuB4KZTZIUNdY5b/kflEPYhGeg4c5 z9rAfomOKVK4jZHt95qnp8FWgxFj3ks= 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-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=bfdnai7awvcKtRS1BGRi/d37MqTO7ALUR1txHt2/v y4=; b=CsrsiZ4lUEl9Ort2ZTAy+xjSBxU+PnRSBYr/Oskhol28uyUu2V98vgdQy Qvm6Nxt0rzd4sSzdnOTdY7AOQK995mEre9KLW6SgMnSQ0ym0wN7dy1o+ndyFGuiQ 4A2GQPFnGSaTcrKBHr0ZRB21ifqpB6l45ejwrpcaRPChrTZKRthSQW6UHF/X1g3N jj2i4tVj45+kNG8HO8DUIEYnC4uCPALgTrEBGH8bmuIlpPulrMUxyQTm3xJTmp64 nARmdpnZ3gfLRXsG35xNwYTpszenuhuPHuLEYsz8II/4MRYOuj6FjQQoIuxguT4O NHMKAAUrDzQZgM05S4asVcHvRHhEg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrfeejgddutddvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpeguphgukhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeegnecu vehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrg hssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B5771306007B; Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:32:02 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: dev@dpdk.org, "jerinj@marvell.com" , "maxime.coquelin@redhat.com" , "Ye, Xiaolong" , Nithin Dabilpuram , Kiran Kumar K , Zhihong Wang Cc: "Zhang, Qi Z" , "rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com" , "Wang, Xiao W" , "xavier.huwei@huawei.com" , "Xing, Beilei" , "Lu, Wenzhuo" , "Yang, Qiming" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , "Yigit, Ferruh" , "rmody@marvell.com" , "shshaikh@marvell.com" , Andrew Rybchenko Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:32:01 +0200 Message-ID: <8045952.dE46n4Xy2H@thomas> In-Reply-To: <26aaaba9-ac76-c917-a00e-145e3e2d0432@solarflare.com> References: <20200311230136.63452-1-thomas@monjalon.net> <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E70611547E55AD@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <26aaaba9-ac76-c917-a00e-145e3e2d0432@solarflare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] refresh NIC features matrix 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Call for action below (especially for octeontx2 and virtio): 24/03/2020 09:36, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 3/20/20 2:15 PM, Zhang, Qi Z wrote: > > From: Thomas Monjalon > >> 20/03/2020 06:35, Zhang, Qi Z: > >>> From: Thomas Monjalon > >>>> > >>>> This series aims to clean-up the big table of ethdev features: > >>>> http://doc.dpdk.org/guides/nics/overview.html#id1 > >>>> > >>>> We could reorganize the information in this table, maybe split it or > >>>> add/remove some rows. > >>>> Before going to such reorganization, we should clean it up. [...] > >>>> More columns can be removed by merging PF/VF and vector datapaths. > >>>> If a feature cannot be supported in all cases, it should be marked > >>>> as partially supported (P). I see that Intel merged "vec" columns for its PMDs. We are still missing octeontx2 and virtio. In order to make sure the message is received, I suggest blocking any patch in these PMDs until features matrix is fixed. > >>>> If a feature is PF-specific (like flow control), that's OK to mark > >>>> it fully supported because it's obviously impossible for VF. > >>>> There are also some features which were probably marked in some > >>>> columns and missed in its VF or vector counterpart. Ideally we should remove all these columns (VF to be discussed): > >>>> - cxgbevf > >>>> - fm10k_vf > >>>> - hns3_vf > >>>> - i40e_vf > >>>> - igb_vf > >>>> - ixgbe_vf > >>>> - octeontx2_vec > >>>> - octeontx2_vf > >>>> - qede_vf > >>>> - virtio_vec > >>>> > >>>> The total gain is to reduce the table size from 71 to 47 columns. > >>> > >>> I agree to remove all the column with "vec", since vector PMD can be > >>> regarded as a feature of the a PMD. > >>> But I'm not sure if it is a good idea to merge VF and PF into one column. > >>> From my view, for intel device, VF driver and PF driver just share the code, > >>> but they actually are running at two different context. > >>> And likely they will support different feature, merge into one column may > >>> confuse our customer if they want to understand what exactly the PMD > >>> support. > >> > >> I understand you have 2 different datapaths. > >> My arguments are: > >> - it is the same NIC > > > > Yes, but one device can be polymorphic, ideally i40e and i40evf > > could be in two different folder, and the common part can be a > > library in driver/common/i40e. [...] > > >> - you cannot summarize everything in a table > >> - we have two many columns to make it readable > > > > I don't think columns number is critical, typically user just need > > to focus on the first column and the specific driver's column, > > Too many columns still makes it harder to read/analyze. I think > the main goal of the table is too help making NIC choice to > be installed in a server and you can't make a choice between > PF and VF. Difference between PF and VF capabilities is > a separate story and out-of-scope of the table. > We have a new driver(s) in each DPDK release and table is > already big and will grow more and more. > > > I guess it may not a big challenge to enable some filter by front end web technique? > > > >> I think the right solution is mark features as partially available (P), and give > >> details in the driver guide documentation. Other opinions about removing/merging VF columns?