From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B10F61F5 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:53:23 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5829E208EF; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 09:53:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 07 Jul 2017 09:53:23 -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=v/5MjK2cG9dGy1Q HDIzvhUozxv/jNDHzlzMXE/GzOa0=; b=YxcgxuaTCGDAEYuqIoJ7DKU0lmhZsOc mg8FWVvWwdHSw1zwrVUyu1jb6HJ2epAIMAtxPBhZSVL8heRF6/aphOchEoM8x0ZR 1MTWEYvBH9EDdKXYAKMUuQwScPoS5D5y5oAQfhhVZy16OWEdNwfIWS0CpBYYD7U4 HFKj5jES7ch0= 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=v/5MjK2cG9dGy1QHDIzvhUozxv/jNDHzlzMXE/GzOa0=; b=Nzuy89OY 9NY5qUHUFPXdWM59aiwfSFfo79rjcX7SMB3AwAfCGX8h9WI/VV9qpJvjIezbmedX AVskd0rSE6Kvb1FZHaSfGlpDrY2rRJ7E59yknOafcca/9Z+kfqIyfi0ycEx8SgP6 zndwUn0dcJgeVylXaFFh61glqtM4Y79cJ+kd0Xqi2KRBjjVAytDEjmrKOYgPyU4p o1CALAhOj6ZWMd5boEnCKIM5dlEZ3dr/ZRJIkAnlRiiprM+Brp4umX26ndFULdNX 4q+rukoYTFpMzpEyOndW7y6BjTb1UtqPbN5jUnepPUsXsZQGUrfxph+rmqRMh82K D6VNQu8bwgVZXw== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: OIUm4gAPbrJqcYrRTqawjLltCjOGY3UtOoYuvvCA56rM 1499435603 Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0937924741; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 09:53:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: Andrew Rybchenko , John McNamara , dev@dpdk.org, Olivier Matz Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:53:22 +0200 Message-ID: <8948822.3HyaHf9bfD@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20170622190233.67933-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <8a981e9a-2215-a2ae-cb75-5982fd714845@solarflare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] doc: document NIC features 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: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 13:53:23 -0000 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.