Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/5] ethdev: add API to negotiate delivery of Rx meta data

[Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>]

Hi Ori,

On 9/30/21 5:59 PM, Ori Kam wrote:
> Hi Ivan,
> Sorry for jumping in late.
> 
> I have a concern that this patch breaks other PMDs.
>>From the rst file " One should negotiate flag delivery beforehand"
> since you only added this function for your PMD all other PMD will fail.
> I see that you added exception in the  examples, but it doesn't make sense
> that applications will also need to add this exception which is not documented.

It is a new API and the function description lists possible
return codes. An application can handle these return codes
gracefully. I'm not sure that it makes sense to highlight
it as a special case.

> 
> Please see more comments inline.

See below

> Thanks,
> Ori
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 2:20 PM
>> Subject: [PATCH v3 1/5] ethdev: add API to negotiate delivery of Rx meta
>> data
>>
>> Delivery of mark, flag and the likes might affect small packet performance.
>> If these features are disabled by default, enabling them in started state
>> without causing traffic disruption may not always be possible.
>>
>> Let applications negotiate delivery of Rx meta data beforehand.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
>> Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton <amoreton@xilinx.com>
>> Acked-by: Ray Kinsella <mdr@ashroe.eu>
>> Acked-by: Jerin Jacob <jerinj@marvell.com>

[snip]

>> +__rte_experimental
>> +int rte_eth_rx_meta_negotiate(uint16_t port_id, uint64_t *features);
> 
> I don't think meta is the best name since we also have meta item and the word meta can be used
> in other cases.

Do you have any idea what could be used instead of it?

Thanks,
Andrew.