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 4EC15A0524; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 17:40:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CDB4188715; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 17:40:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ot1-f46.google.com (mail-ot1-f46.google.com [209.85.210.46]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9154C40682 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2021 17:40:31 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-ot1-f46.google.com with SMTP id i20so7451117otl.7 for ; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 08:40:31 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1ZOGIIuS6RwZ30fz80U8bE0dhA+L+yOIc07Bk27USpg=; b=LmvXLBgkydvEdJZL+gu6+QPghgEne/AUwu6I6FXN49b57SlKsB2RlbhmlJxBlRczwG P8rrM3Du0b66b2ZkYol+Ig1boxCxYq/tbjsBB4x/sFdXpyUGjBdGi/RDQxtzEvtPCQSg ezJXl/PlgGwUhdt/Z3hv57dn9b+/ErOiAuK8o= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1ZOGIIuS6RwZ30fz80U8bE0dhA+L+yOIc07Bk27USpg=; b=gFFme/NUQEoNakd0tZFhI9j6NOR3r61Px2z5m2h/M7EBNOOwVvzR6Un1MZvUQH4n3v aT9xS+SuqgZegLgAAl3Ao+6jSnqEgrnJ9AIB3lgf2q/87dNSQCMcQiT7cjsoe03snFLW n0njh4AYUJd+HIL/VxINnhty8qKJt4RVPy0mXdZF9czvNWinKpd/5Vx3krCLPSPn01nl BvVoMY3KNa5zloA5bDTMK6jWViY0r7I7qovxa3PJuYoh5/RL+DsgMZmdcQFYRCp/1RFs 7GxPqoBGTT69/opSvN45xzJuSWc/349zZwcAERQbbxxOujV3rpPWCCkfoSeaKqicukoM 6mlg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530653vcxdB4ZlTDJC178uJahEwuHRDQIfXozBOPfSHhTtdTF5NK E2lrd3Sq76GaW9xHrd9HQYzwoFgEpTAEuv7xJazhHQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy6ks5u+ZuMKaHntb2VECUc1iyiSUPj2JablCAXa1rxpdjvn+bE8EjqOBR2SFHUty5x1rh3JGL7u4vzaxpPvxg= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:2035:: with SMTP id n50mr3807501ota.44.1612543230742; Fri, 05 Feb 2021 08:40:30 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210205142650.1106807-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20210205142650.1106807-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> From: Lance Richardson Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2021 11:40:19 -0500 Message-ID: To: Ferruh Yigit Cc: Wenzhuo Lu , Xiaoyun Li , Bernard Iremonger , dev@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="000000000000797b4605ba997ae7" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: remove duplicated offload display 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 Sender: "dev" --000000000000797b4605ba997ae7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 9:27 AM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > "show port cap all|" was to display offload configuration of > port(s). > > But later two other commands added to show same information in more > accurate way: > show port (port_id) rx_offload configuration > show port (port_id) tx_offload configuration > > These new commands can both show port and queue level configuration, > also with their capabilities counterparts easier to see offload > capability and configuration of the port in similar syntax. > > So the functionality is duplicated and removing this version, to favor > the new commands. > > Another problem with this command is it requires each new offload to be > added into the function to display them, and there were missing offloads > that are not displayed, this requirement for sure will create gaps by > time as new offloads added. > > Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit > --- Acked-by: Lance Richardson --000000000000797b4605ba997ae7--