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 178FC46F6A; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 22:52:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05BA5409FA; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 22:52:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pl1-f175.google.com (mail-pl1-f175.google.com [209.85.214.175]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0CD4064A for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 22:52:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pl1-f175.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-271067d66fbso2605525ad.3 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 13:52:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=iol.unh.edu; s=unh-iol; t=1758747121; x=1759351921; darn=dpdk.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=nShOuG+1MXhi214+HW8hyUGRPnpnblRTvWGOnoqPnlc=; b=LUllkAkO6S6d97bgrU+4byLLYZLgnTX8bMb6i9KfOFxVqyly39hESDmg384gnFpP9l jtVGgZYNU4gYlgJgcn+pR8DbIzdUiCfsUKyuIsvcPpoTZe6EAZyUpT872psUX79zIzEY mu5cS4IyV+mAkt3S9dfzNSgNJ58SOsA/D0GqI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1758747121; x=1759351921; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=nShOuG+1MXhi214+HW8hyUGRPnpnblRTvWGOnoqPnlc=; b=spTE1SdHRNMXsQ4qh4WX7icUUWJLp9eugylUt2dBbCMhjtqS5Ba+ZzGr5/piH6382d lAtAFl3Cy3MNYFHo82fGgqn7S5YkQI8HZeTRQ+3Aeshm2gVNIlpl5vrDdnACVSDHut7v 7RtFwt59G2Qend30U+HnvuaHJL/Jajh9tkngaP918JiAMY0JAEmrTUG3DrUUtROLzHIp xnhfVeScuAXEhNb6Xq8CoXWveQVFDvQOrmaRYBbs320WdnNRkbH1e2VZKl7ilBQDzhx0 YMTcx5jxELgTKyQKgIr2BOdoYcuJR3MSU0Jv+cw31hD1dIHCq/Vmsq2YBjiVi2rRUj8A GjVQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUcmijg5yTbv0IN8oVnm0sdygRpJl8ss+iG5CFpkxC++Ea/ZkuBpglr2ZpGoN+Ndxxrx3g=@dpdk.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxq+BX3HgaKbZcBlIqrauahbA5heT9jNAXn+kNdJu4AFnTAYAse TZWdaGxb9A9vVhvYmHEtHtDK4cqG7S61mkH0e/EfLtsCUWtvlhLALr5Apn6Vr1PIOj0KC+PEd1W ZlJ0WdnFb02vONTjlB/XWlB1lZrSjyueS7qjGLw993M+s4A9HAeq2 X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsOSNxFS5mIbpbS/kidjClH2mkgt6SwC9XAUdIIAWUEj2K3qGbd4nWH1QREqqP jD6O83Pe9rLMqwEPqpyTvnIKs91c2q4uhUDtZh4X5vYwk3wtczRBTcdlK/OfGoFFAiXZ1vXS3Dd H4Csgd1ISgd55o1H9FncN1GY8k1nTyIbolHEsR0rmdnhmc+Of5OBx5WtJiD64FGGxTukOT7OQJf RzO3WL+uwGAJNWZXvuJkMSXk1eekTkP9wnd9C9Na+1zOGfaqSc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH3g91AcUqaA5wP+/gEdJWw9+LmHDk2YTecL43CQw8aXFFe4L70tDmWCeau95ugIq58r5LKHsNGdz0Xuv4Tu+E= X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:298f:b0:269:91b2:e9d6 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-27ed4a6f290mr10320765ad.46.1758747121303; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 13:52:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250902114327.48185-1-abailey@iol.unh.edu> <20250924164725.168773-1-abailey@iol.unh.edu> <20250924164725.168773-3-abailey@iol.unh.edu> In-Reply-To: <20250924164725.168773-3-abailey@iol.unh.edu> From: Patrick Robb Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 16:51:39 -0400 X-Gm-Features: AS18NWC-3iDnqvDTkT388_NZIM_byOHVmcFVHWFrTVKuODzT1Jy08wupMtboR1Y Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] dts: add TX offload capabilities to NIC capabilities To: Andrew Bailey Cc: luca.vizzarro@arm.com, dev@dpdk.org, dmarx@iol.unh.edu, ivan.malov@arknetworks.am, Jeremy Spewock Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006a549c063f9239ee" 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 --0000000000006a549c063f9239ee Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Sep 24, 2025 at 12:47=E2=80=AFPM Andrew Bailey wrote: > Currently, there is no support for tracking tx_offload capabilities and > there is no separation between port capabilities and queue > capabilities. This is an issue if a test case requires a tx_offload > capability or if a test case requires that a card supports a capability > on a queue. This causes test cases with said requirements to not be > skipped when appropriate. Add tx_offload capabilities and distinguish > capabilities between ports and queues. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Bailey > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock > > - Args: > - line: The line to parse. > +@dataclass > +class OffloadCapabilities(TextParser): > + """The result of testpmd's ``show port tx_offload > capabilities`` command. > tx_offload or rx_offload, right? Reviewed-by: Patrick Robb --0000000000006a549c063f9239ee Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Sep 24,= 2025 at 12:47=E2=80=AFPM Andrew Bailey <abailey@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
Currently, there is no support for tracking tx_o= ffload capabilities and
there is no separation between port capabilities and queue
capabilities. This is an issue if a test case requires a tx_offload
capability or if a test case requires that a card supports a capability
on a queue. This causes test cases with said requirements to not be
skipped when appropriate. Add tx_offload capabilities and distinguish
capabilities between ports and queues.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Bailey <abailey@iol.unh.edu>
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>

-=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Args:
-=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 line: The line to parse.
+@dataclass
+class OffloadCapabilities(TextParser):
+=C2=A0 =C2=A0 """The result of testpmd's ``show port &l= t;port_id> tx_offload capabilities`` command.

<= /div>
tx_offload or rx_offload, right?
=C2=A0
Revie= wed-by: Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh= .edu>=C2=A0
--0000000000006a549c063f9239ee--