From: Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/4] ethdev: introduce Rx queue offloads API
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2017 06:22:25 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <VI1PR05MB3149F7198162D0AC34B4EC17C39C0@VI1PR05MB3149.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <81b3f08a-da63-6b5f-7592-d41521c395e7@intel.com>
Tuesday, August 29, 2017 3:50 PM, Ferruh Yigit:
> On 8/7/2017 11:54 AM, Shahaf Shuler wrote:
> > Introduce a new API to configure Rx offloads.
> >
> > The new API will re-use existing DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_* flags to enable the
> > different offloads. This will ease the process of adding a new Rx
> > offloads, as no ABI breakage is involved.
> > In addition, the offload configuration can be done per queue, instead
> > of per port.
>
> If a device doesn't have capability to set the offload per queue how should it
> behave, I think it is good to define this.
Yes, will add documentation.
How about If device cannot set offloads per queue, then the queue_setup function should return with ENOTSUP ?
>
> >
> > The Rx queue offload API can be used only with devices which advertize
> > the RTE_ETH_DEV_RXQ_OFFLOAD capability.
> >
> > The old Rx offloads API is kept for the meanwhile, in order to enable
> > a smooth transition for PMDs and application to the new API.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>
>
> <...>
>
> > @@ -357,7 +357,14 @@ struct rte_eth_rxmode {
> > jumbo_frame : 1, /**< Jumbo Frame Receipt enable. */
> > hw_strip_crc : 1, /**< Enable CRC stripping by hardware. */
> > enable_scatter : 1, /**< Enable scatter packets rx handler */
> > - enable_lro : 1; /**< Enable LRO */
> > + enable_lro : 1, /**< Enable LRO */
> > + ignore : 1;
>
> what do you think making this variable more verbose, like
> "ignore_rx_offloads"
>
> "dev_conf.rxmode.ignore" doesn't say on its own what is ignored.
Maybe ignore_offloads ? Rx is quite explicit from rxomde.
>
> > + /**
> > + * When set the rxmode offloads should be ignored,
> > + * instead the Rx offloads will be set on rte_eth_rxq_conf.
> > + * This bit is temporary till rxmode Rx offloads API will
> > + * be deprecated.
> > + */
> > };
>
> <...>
>
> > +/** Device supports the rte_eth_rxq_conf offloads API */ #define
> > +RTE_ETH_DEV_RXQ_OFFLOAD 0x0010
> Since this is temporary flag and with current implementation this is local to
> library, should we put this into public header?
>
> Later when all PMDs implemented this new method and we want to remove
> the flag, can we remove them or do we have to keep them reserved for any
> conflict for further new values?
>
> I guess this should be part of missing pmd-ethdev interface file
> (rte_ethdev_pmd.h ?).
Yes it is better fits to inner interface between ethdev and PMDs.
Wondering, do we have other motivation to have such header?
>
> >
> > /**
> > * @internal
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-30 6:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-07 10:54 [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/4] ethdev new " Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-07 10:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 1/4] ethdev: rename Rx and Tx configuration structs Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-23 21:39 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-07 10:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/4] ethdev: introduce Rx queue offloads API Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-23 12:21 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-08-23 13:06 ` Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-23 21:48 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-29 12:50 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-08-30 6:22 ` Shahaf Shuler [this message]
2017-08-29 13:11 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-08-07 10:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 3/4] ethdev: introduce Tx " Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-07 10:54 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 4/4] ethdev: add helpers to move to the new " Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-23 12:28 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-08-23 13:13 ` Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-23 22:06 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-24 7:12 ` Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-25 13:26 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-29 12:55 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-08-30 6:30 ` Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-30 7:50 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-08-30 10:16 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-08-30 12:42 ` Ferruh Yigit
2017-08-30 13:25 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-30 14:15 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-08-28 14:12 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-08-29 6:26 ` Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-29 9:43 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2017-08-23 6:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/4] ethdev " Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-23 22:16 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-08-25 10:31 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-08-27 6:05 ` Shahaf Shuler
2017-08-28 5:00 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-08-28 10:57 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-09-05 7:07 ` Jerin Jacob
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=VI1PR05MB3149F7198162D0AC34B4EC17C39C0@VI1PR05MB3149.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com \
--to=shahafs@mellanox.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).