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 45676A0562; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:15:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CEF01412F6; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:15:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA2F81410BC; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:15:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62CF95C0039; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 09:15:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 01 Apr 2021 09:15:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm3; bh= FTO3tGcNKsaLI/dgyfGUa45njOSX3/AxCRFNevlN5Xw=; b=FFiv+4QpqKNHOtvA tqypsTgxvRytzqYBnCE/3F4Ob2t73dC1M5E/j666tn8R2Qq2V/WjfPJVg0h5Cv6W W0Fh450Pry5T4E0eEIhnWn8xOLFMKhA5e9+bplxbfN7/eHydRpokyYCcLeK3NLa+ veDLYM8uImfjFEz2WBbBaudYw65tpp0r3meT26VFAIVHQEuB9EfjjkdOj4/Vr0BJ 8MUjeVZR78ccieljGLd2La0e00LyP14A0hqX4revxScCumNseOo6/z2+9OjDgr// TDf98eIchtnjYkzISWinP6xejmHsBii5cZD7CDH0jbgrXi/UUXL0RcXJ80mNW6cP HdUhFQ== 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-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=FTO3tGcNKsaLI/dgyfGUa45njOSX3/AxCRFNevlN5 Xw=; b=G4CJkA0gSpfrOvS4z0+ucIr6Drrmnd/hI+rnvLeeVfQ8r/Bcmu+oClOP0 /8u9p6vM5XgoQIk1PDpJUNoe/tXUAsYjnotXMPMtmu/Z77kbLya/MFuDZSKBqj4R eZt7qqoNJ+D1S+ESp5Sjjp3InwgqQs6Xt0Plb1HriibOMqJkIsKUbwqfwgLU/MDM 0e7NEAHsWsn61vzG75kuSG+Lfur5poIa1BisXgAVp5aKaBDcJG8iUAz2l0xgBb+l Mn+nav0UtdS3LeWUlE3ZbjyorKQU6kxj1yJVrEajVmoYhcckbJBhywhbP5rI/2aR vopkzjt/3qvrHdIy9AGvUGXYpUDVA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduledrudeigedgheejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecugg ftrfgrthhtvghrnhepffdvffejueetleefieeludduuefgteejleevfeekjeefieegheet ffdvkeefgedunecuffhomhgrihhnpeguphgukhdrohhrghenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrd dvtdefrddukeegnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhf rhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 35FC4240057; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 09:15:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Eli Britstein Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Gaetan Rivet , Asaf Penso , Ori Kam , stable@dpdk.org, matan@nvidia.com, viacheslavo@nvidia.com Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 15:15:39 +0200 Message-ID: <5487886.mdHJMh5dvu@thomas> In-Reply-To: <3ded5f26-d1c7-0d87-0e5d-50ef183e29cc@nvidia.com> References: <20210401074913.16563-1-elibr@nvidia.com> <7504044.RxHU5scrEf@thomas> <3ded5f26-d1c7-0d87-0e5d-50ef183e29cc@nvidia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: add Linux rawio capability requirement in mlx5 guide 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 Sender: "dev" 01/04/2021 14:06, Eli Britstein: > On 4/1/2021 2:39 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > About the title: "rawio" is not a word. > > "raw IO" would be better. > > It was meant for cap_sys_rawio. As underscores are not allowed in the > title, I used "rawio". > > I think "raw IO" misses that meaning. What do you think? I think "raw IO capability" can be understood by everybody. Otherwise "cap_sys_rawio" may be more explicit for those who know. > > 01/04/2021 09:49, Eli Britstein: > >> For an application to be able to create "transfer" rte_flows for mlx5 > > What is "tranfer" rule? > > https://doc.dpdk.org/guides/prog_guide/rte_flow.html#attribute-transfer > > How would you suggest to call it? "transfer flow rule" is OK. Or maybe more explicit: "flow rule with transfer attribute". [...] > >> +``cap_sys_rawio`` optional > >> + For the application to be able to apply rte_flow flows in transfer > >> + mode. > > > > "For the application" looks useless. > > We don't apply "rte_flow flows" but "flow rules". > > What is "transfer mode"? It is not mentioned elsewhere in this doc. You could add the link to the transfer attribute here. > > How this capability is related to dv_esw_en? > > I think FDB flows are applicable only if dv_esw_en=1. Do you think need > to mention it here? Yes > > Do we need it in case of trusted VF? > > I think a VF, even if trusted cannot apply FDB flows. Only the ESW manager. Please confirm, and document if it applies only to PF, etc. When looking at the Linux driver, it seems cap_sys_rawio is required for all these features: MLX5_UCTX_CAP_INTERNAL_DEV_RES MLX5_IB_UAPI_DM_TYPE_STEERING_SW_ICM MLX5_IB_UAPI_DM_TYPE_HEADER_MODIFY_SW_ICM IB_WQ_FLAGS_DELAY_DROP What does apply to the DPDK driver?