From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from EUR01-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-ve1eur01on0079.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.1.79]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43B19DED for ; Wed, 2 May 2018 19:09:51 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Mellanox.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=45rdTbQAMBanwVyVs9qPmDVVdYziyt2i9ZjkWUCO+W8=; b=KB21g3R00snGEBgwkImTeKjwjGlefJP0sB7jNYWI5EEE6z8WIQOevaSFPPAlVGT51UBvWAJa9chdEKY//cn9KDTl+pZxhfbe+vJgBE2Yet4cR69LEuS3osIHL0FP11uIg89+M5Eg9pPkCNXGFeETCkKgnG3uKnOkRw4pcd4Qbh0= Received: from DB7PR05MB4426.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.134.109.15) by DB7PR05MB4299.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com (52.134.108.32) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.20.715.22; Wed, 2 May 2018 17:09:48 +0000 Received: from DB7PR05MB4426.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f116:5be4:ba29:fed8]) by DB7PR05MB4426.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::f116:5be4:ba29:fed8%13]) with mapi id 15.20.0715.024; Wed, 2 May 2018 17:09:48 +0000 From: Shahaf Shuler To: Thomas Monjalon , "Xueming(Steven) Li" , Ferruh Yigit CC: "dev@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix applications failure on configure Thread-Index: AQHT4fwtiq2ebVj/d0KaKFWRLzmAHKQcNmyAgAB11rA= Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 17:09:48 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20180501133343.125260-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <68310139-6baf-baab-bbe9-3da0883960bc@intel.com> <4396631.OICrUNRNKa@xps> In-Reply-To: <4396631.OICrUNRNKa@xps> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=shahafs@mellanox.com; x-originating-ip: [31.154.10.107] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; DB7PR05MB4299; 7:89z9ON7QuLCtQ7EGNz7mlbhVT6cRdxXYx8qwAJsqeuz4szI487cB1wDjbC12a4M2Z0IGvap/chxVYBLK1qy1KT50lcuurYFev7/2uZ6GTmWnhDgbiega1iTOlvVwzpKDUG22Tv1OKML2WqvnOa+dOcXknhva5ijR8kZgxm3S/49+2W2Ff6ciha5S7KZmJ9BeDKhd178hIfpPy51mCpHmCCGvOB7K0jfBo1ZylfR2rNeiDnaEu/nPYEnYllQaU+yH x-ms-exchange-antispam-srfa-diagnostics: SOS; x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(7020095)(4652020)(48565401081)(5600026)(4534165)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020); SRVR:DB7PR05MB4299; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DB7PR05MB4299: x-ld-processed: a652971c-7d2e-4d9b-a6a4-d149256f461b,ExtAddr x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(278428928389397)(189930954265078)(45079756050767)(228905959029699); x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(8211001083)(6040522)(2401047)(8121501046)(5005006)(93006095)(93001095)(3231254)(944501410)(52105095)(3002001)(10201501046)(6055026)(6041310)(201703131423095)(201702281528075)(20161123555045)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123560045)(20161123564045)(20161123558120)(20161123562045)(6072148)(201708071742011); SRVR:DB7PR05MB4299; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:DB7PR05MB4299; x-forefront-prvs: 06607E485E x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(366004)(376002)(39380400002)(346002)(396003)(39860400002)(189003)(199004)(486006)(478600001)(966005)(45080400002)(99286004)(25786009)(8936002)(68736007)(106356001)(105586002)(186003)(93886005)(11346002)(446003)(476003)(102836004)(6506007)(59450400001)(2900100001)(3660700001)(305945005)(7736002)(76176011)(97736004)(5660300001)(26005)(7696005)(3846002)(3280700002)(6116002)(4326008)(74316002)(33656002)(6246003)(8676002)(81166006)(81156014)(6306002)(55016002)(229853002)(2906002)(316002)(9686003)(5250100002)(66066001)(14454004)(6436002)(86362001)(575784001)(110136005)(53936002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DB7PR05MB4299; H:DB7PR05MB4426.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: mellanox.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: h1P0/Q/SyF/PVW0BXyTFUpC4tsFxlVru7bVQKfAi8+GIwf0BoqEG+uWUP4l9Id0ekc2IIBX52HxV94g8x9hqvB4gpBtnGiVYL5oN6L/6F6/WjVSC4MZqYwGi2vu9+Pua0Moczqy4Wj2f6v+EJE3pBeeSSdwWxVziHlcx87ZUfmAvyPyr7rMDupQbsJF9SUNC spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Office365-Filtering-Correlation-Id: 0f989944-6aa5-44a6-7637-08d5b04f82f5 X-OriginatorOrg: Mellanox.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0f989944-6aa5-44a6-7637-08d5b04f82f5 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 02 May 2018 17:09:48.7104 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a652971c-7d2e-4d9b-a6a4-d149256f461b X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB7PR05MB4299 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix applications failure on configure 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: Wed, 02 May 2018 17:09:51 -0000 Wednesday, May 2, 2018 1:06 PM, Thomas Monjalon: > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: fix applications failure on confi= gure >=20 > 02/05/2018 11:58, Xueming(Steven) Li: > > From: Ferruh Yigit > > > Or as Xueming suggested, we can take rss_hf config as best effort and > not return error at all. > > > > > > I think this forces PMDs to have up-to-date flow_type_rss_offloads > values, is there any other benefit? > > > What was the initial motivation to add error return on this check? > > > > The original idea is to add rss_hf check on mlx5 PMD, while it looks > > more generic to move the check to ethdev api from discussion[1]. > > > > [1] > > > https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fww > w. > > dpdk.org%2Fml%2Farchives%2Fdev%2F2018- > April%2F095136.html&data=3D02%7C01 > > > %7Cshahafs%40mellanox.com%7Cc773c15dcbda49d21da008d5b0145864%7C > a652971 > > > c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636608523825745897&sdata=3DjDU > OyU0E% > > 2FY5g3oSKBQxUsz8Ehr%2FN3ek5h8kotQBLZBU%3D&reserved=3D0 >=20 > I think it is not correct to not return an error when the app request an = offload > which is not supported. >=20 > Do we agree to work on PMDs and applications to fix this offload > compliance? > And submit a deprecation notice to return an error in a later release? I probably missed it but why deprecation notice is required?=20 Per my understanding it is just a fix to enforce better the API which is: 1. application reads capabilities=20 2. application sets offloads accordingly.=20 >=20