From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F703376C for ; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 15:53:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8A1020C69; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 09:53:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 04 Sep 2017 09:53:34 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=irr/f6/ivpDE+uD SmDvTa21F6MPXTub4e5MXU+husKc=; b=c7WLpsNihAr4hOqtt1H64+so+ai9pXT efWIECniRDbbFDKCrja4y/EEPf7b+L4sI2l7/+ESGvJARdcH0hd2kpaLPTRThVXQ D6Hlqjk7atoIeXKmymkxmSUPKa6E7k2W920shDNc3gmRMcYEiT+z8LOf7GwQPZEn Ot+4eVNCacUg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=irr/f6/ivpDE+uDSmDvTa21F6MPXTub4e5MXU+husKc=; b=CBtz7Fly 0qtI3drzGiTb7Ur17N0KuYRJbv40/hCHvmfAKX2V/gVlefVaJP86uvdmOsYt9FaN ojg17keQUnzUeui+cV15/SLmoMkOwHxQTGCzvBHn6wdlGhriPyEUy0anJr0kMIuc 0P49Pxdhr+1t4DSuSfd9QUeloghY3LvPHrBxnorSZwi4FFATPUOzxkr4SoRq3KAK q4rg5Jz/IRBPVswD1UpAWZzBr0c4LY3j7RWvaybmTzp2Y99GZ/ZUm83R9gng5s9H xOiSJGEPR6cL33xCA3xGHiG3sSWxfFmEbnakmCDmCQEvJgyTmiqs7aJ/14IsKrWw SJyZA/bXspuOkQ== X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: 0mNFPV8PVBD3ch1gJv823RhPmgEF0CC2OXvLGGpKgpEM 1504533214 Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 6FB54248EC; Mon, 4 Sep 2017 09:53:34 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" Cc: Shahaf Shuler , dev@dpdk.org Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 15:53:33 +0200 Message-ID: <2327783.H4uO08xLcu@xps> In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772584F24602F@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <810c1d26724f82f0d9fc9d6684dc4b1c62fd5f62.1504508375.git.shahafs@mellanox.com> <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772584F24602F@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/4] ethdev: add helpers to move to the new offloads API 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: Mon, 04 Sep 2017 13:53:36 -0000 04/09/2017 15:25, Ananyev, Konstantin: > Hi Shahaf, > > > +/** > > + * A conversion function from rxmode offloads API to rte_eth_rxq_conf > > + * offloads API. > > + */ > > +static void > > +rte_eth_convert_rxmode_offloads(struct rte_eth_rxmode *rxmode, > > + struct rte_eth_rxq_conf *rxq_conf) > > +{ > > + if (rxmode->header_split == 1) > > + rxq_conf->offloads |= DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT; > > + if (rxmode->hw_ip_checksum == 1) > > + rxq_conf->offloads |= DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_CHECKSUM; > > + if (rxmode->hw_vlan_filter == 1) > > + rxq_conf->offloads |= DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_FILTER; > > Thinking on it a bit more: > VLAN_FILTER is definitely one per device, as it would affect VFs also. > At least that's what we have for Intel devices (ixgbe, i40e) right now. > For Intel devices VLAN_STRIP is also per device and > will also be applied to all corresponding VFs. > In fact, right now it is possible to query/change these 3 vlan offload flags on the fly > (after dev_start) on port basis by rte_eth_dev_(get|set)_vlan_offload API. > So, I think at least these 3 flags need to be remained on a port basis. I don't understand how it helps to be able to configure the same thing in 2 places. I think you are just describing a limitation of these HW: some offloads must be the same for all queues. It does not prevent from configuring them in the per-queue setup. > In fact, why can't we have both per port and per queue RX offload: > - dev_configure() will accept RX_OFFLOAD_* flags and apply them on a port basis. > - rx_queue_setup() will also accept RX_OFFLOAD_* flags and apply them on a queue basis. > - if particular RX_OFFLOAD flag for that device couldn't be setup on a queue basis - > rx_queue_setup() will return an error. The queue setup can work while the value is the same for every queues. > - rte_eth_rxq_info can be extended to provide information which RX_OFFLOADs > can be configured on a per queue basis. Yes the PMD should advertise its limitations like being forced to apply the same configuration to all its queues. > BTW - in that case we probably wouldn't need ignore flag inside rx_conf anymore.