From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [67.231.154.164]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 598832C8 for ; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 17:39:16 +0200 (CEST) Received: from pure.maildistiller.com (unknown [10.110.50.29]) by dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (Proofpoint Essentials ESMTP Server) with ESMTP id C223C600AF; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:39:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Proofpoint Essentials engine Received: from mx6-us1.ppe-hosted.com (unknown [10.110.49.251]) by pure.maildistiller.com (Proofpoint Essentials ESMTP Server) with ESMTPS id 4205B8004F; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:39:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from webmail.solarflare.com (uk.solarflare.com [193.34.186.16]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx6-us1.ppe-hosted.com (Proofpoint Essentials ESMTP Server) with ESMTPS id DBD144C005D; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 15:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.239.128] (85.187.13.33) by ukex01.SolarFlarecom.com (10.17.10.4) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1044.25; Fri, 7 Jul 2017 16:39:09 +0100 To: Ferruh Yigit , John McNamara References: <20170622190233.67933-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <20170705132028.58993-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <8a981e9a-2215-a2ae-cb75-5982fd714845@solarflare.com> <199b9881-26d4-f36d-9737-02b8559d449e@intel.com> CC: , Olivier Matz From: Andrew Rybchenko Message-ID: <56cd604e-fcad-ca66-aee5-bade5c9a20a3@solarflare.com> Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2017 18:38:56 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <199b9881-26d4-f36d-9737-02b8559d449e@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [85.187.13.33] X-ClientProxiedBy: ocex03.SolarFlarecom.com (10.20.40.36) To ukex01.SolarFlarecom.com (10.17.10.4) X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-11.0.0.1191-8.100.1062-23180.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No--2.798600-0.000000-31 X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No X-MDID: 1499441955-K-MyjioHE1VJ Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] doc: document NIC features 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: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:39:16 -0000 On 07/07/2017 06:06 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: > On 7/7/2017 11:55 AM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > <...> > >>> +TSO >>> +--- >>> + >>> +Supports TCP Segmentation Offloading. >>> + >>> +* **mbuf**: ``mbuf.ol_flags:PKT_TX_TCP_SEG``. >> DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_*_TSO in tx_offload_capa >> Is support of one TSO option sufficient to say Yes? > This is common question for a few offload features, like ones that can > be valid for Rx and Tx path, I guess feature should be "Yes" if all are > supported, otherwise "P(artial)". IMHO, it would be more informative to have separate features for TCP, UDP and encapsulated TSO offloads. Otherwise when a new TSO offload flag is added, it should change all Y to P (and update PMDs documentation to provide details). > But this is hard to trace and if marked as "P", makes hard to figure out > what is supported. Ideally for all "P" it should be a hyperlink to PMD documentation section which provides details. > <...> <...>