Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] doc: document NIC features

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

07/07/2017 15:37, Ferruh Yigit:
> On 7/7/2017 11:55 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
> > Also some PMDs have few implementations of the datapath (like vector and 
> > usual). Ideally
> > we need common way to highlight it. May be it is OK that control path 
> > features are duplicated
> > in this case, but ideally it should be expressed somehow.
> 
> I agree different datapath implementations can be documented better, I
> just don't know how to do ...
> 
> For some drivers there are multiple vector implementations and the
> feature set for them is not clear. And as you said control features are
> duplicated in the table.
> 
> Perhaps control and datapath features can be separated.
> 
> Or as Thomas suggested sometime ago, vector and scalar version can be
> merged into one in the table and feature can be marked as supported if
> both scalar and vector has support for it. But this is not solving
> multiple vector implementation problem.

Yes it is the way to go.
The features should not be different from a datapath implementation to
another one. So they must be merged in only one column.
If a feature is not supported in every datapaths of a driver, it should
be marked as partially supported... and the developers must implement it.