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 8E010A0032; Wed, 13 Jul 2022 11:49:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61C904282B; Wed, 13 Jul 2022 11:49:56 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 939324069D for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2022 11:49:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AB6B5C02B6; Wed, 13 Jul 2022 05:49:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 13 Jul 2022 05:49:55 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1657705795; x= 1657792195; bh=6NJ5+lWUktS2Hngu8vThLeYOaRTJZheAvLVvFIeyvSA=; b=z gvarLD458JyOaVRT+w+oP9fR5Q0j8AmTscFt7O4E2fYGK6e8+d+SaA56QOYssrqW Nsxsrs8RI1YUUH5DyPU0wCpnPadSZuuM4feEGCq1wXdFkYDmYd3QtNm8oAZXD8hb uYIGgRE8SEAPQiqME642ABvtNHwWgUR4vrh1j0DhRDipkMzPyKhR/wn68YJugxa1 reReN6U+6d0jVyNGAURmxvyu1vEWEVlY56hFyFtxXTTsH4Iku82RTZooMUvdMP4p +H3flIrJ6LiPyMQMjVv7sOHq1icFP410YcdqxcjjU4Uvu8o6t0i+7eWFZwYEdBSa 4EqTvNehQJwN/ZEs6SYtg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1657705795; x= 1657792195; bh=6NJ5+lWUktS2Hngu8vThLeYOaRTJZheAvLVvFIeyvSA=; b=j z3G6CbB4Kl/rUNU3CHyqZ07Yu6ebR/br/dtt50AcsZI2MzBusdNMUqH1+cfqErqB tG/wzt4SC5tD6xSMEv0zMQ9nQicavPC43N15JD6CrTfukIlvPLJkMKS277mY2gnJ w/Bc5EhklUePSX08RXj++A5fGzrovdZorfKfdNHotUG2Q4FJjrVMg9tXD/Gk1Cz0 Wv14lEFUdS0d796QvQoNfc34HvI79J0yp/na34fblYtIq6C3Pm6vRtwdbtBmRM2n YknA1r+3WJcNE8ZrkHbc6MaRrY0Ju6EjWOpf0cRlIZN0xF7AQt+z2dEAlM1jzcs9 5Cj0ZpJphMca7ftYw0A4g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrudejjedgudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefhvfevufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtuf ertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghs sehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnheptdejieeifeehtdffgf dvleetueeffeehueejgfeuteeftddtieekgfekudehtdfgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihii vgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonh drnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 13 Jul 2022 05:49:53 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: xuan.ding@intel.com Cc: andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru, mdr@ashroe.eu, dev@dpdk.org, stephen@networkplumber.org, mb@smartsharesystems.com, dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: announce header split deprecation Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2022 11:49:51 +0200 Message-ID: <11233520.IZOipudI63@thomas> In-Reply-To: <20220523142016.44451-1-xuan.ding@intel.com> References: <20220523142016.44451-1-xuan.ding@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 23/05/2022 16:20, xuan.ding@intel.com: > From: Xuan Ding > > RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT offload was introduced some time ago to > substitute bit-field header_split in struct rte_eth_rxmode. It allows > to enable header split offload with the header size controlled using > split_hdr_size in the same structure. > > Right now, no single PMD actually supports RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT > with above definition. Many examples and test apps initialize the field > to 0 explicitly. The most of drivers simply ignore split_hdr_size since > the offload is not advertised, but some double-check that its value is 0. > > So the RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT and split_header_size field > will be removed in DPDK 22.11. > > Signed-off-by: Xuan Ding > --- > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > index 4e5b23c53d..b8114f29ed 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > @@ -125,3 +125,7 @@ Deprecation Notices > applications should be updated to use the ``dmadev`` library instead, > with the underlying HW-functionality being provided by the ``ioat`` or > ``idxd`` dma drivers > + > +* ethdev: After bit-field header split was removed, the ``RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT`` > +offload and the ``split_hdr_size`` field in structure ``rte_eth_rxmode`` to enable header > +split offload are not supported in any PMDs. They will be removed in DPDK 22.11. It would have been good to talk about rte_eth_rxseg_split which is similar and configured per-queue.