Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: add new field to rxq info struct

[Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>]

On 2020/8/6 20:50, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Chengchang Tang
>> Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 7:01
>> To: dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: linuxarm@huawei.com; Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>;
>> ferruh.yigit@intel.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
>> stephen@networkplumber.org
>> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: add new field to rxq info struct
>>
>> Struct rte_eth_rxq_info will be modified to include a new field, indicating the
>> size of each buffer that could be used for hw to receive packets. Add this
>> field to rte_eth_rxq_info to expose relevant information to upper layer
>> users/application.
>>
>> For more details:
>> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmails.
>> dpdk.org%2Farchives%2Fdev%2F2020-
>> July%2F176135.html&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cviacheslavo%40mellanox.com
>> %7Cdb0d8bcc221145a4a67508d839bd9f14%7Ca652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149
>> 256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637322833881598698&amp;sdata=W2G3iEdepIjSlp
>> Wq4296k7cmXV1RhMnfl88TAjivWLc%3D&amp;reserved=0
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>
>> Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
>> ---
>>  v2:
>>  - Remove field name.
>>  - Fix some spelling mistakes.
>> ---
>>  doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 9 +++++++++
>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>> b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>> index ea4cfa7..f08b5f9 100644
>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>> @@ -110,6 +110,15 @@ Deprecation Notices
>>    break the ABI checks, that is why change is planned for 20.11.
>>    The list of internal APIs are mainly ones listed in ``rte_ethdev_driver.h``.
>>
>> +* ethdev: A new field will be added to the public data structure
>> +  ``rte_eth_rxq_info`` to indicate the buffer size used in receiving
>> +packets
>> +  for HW. When receive packets, HW DMA won't exceed this size. And it
>> +will
>> +  affect the number of fragments in receiving packets when scatter is
>> enabled.
>> +  So, add this field to ``rte_eth_rxq_info`` to expose relevant
>> +information to
>> +  upper layer user/application.
>> +  This change is planned for 20.11. For more details:
>> +
>> +https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmail
>> s
>> +.dpdk.org%2Farchives%2Fdev%2F2020-
>> July%2F176135.html&amp;data=02%7C01%7
>> +Cviacheslavo%40mellanox.com%7Cdb0d8bcc221145a4a67508d839bd9f14
>> %7Ca65297
>> +1c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C637322833881598698&amp
>> ;sdata=W2G3i
>> +EdepIjSlpWq4296k7cmXV1RhMnfl88TAjivWLc%3D&amp;reserved=0
>> +
>>  * traffic manager: All traffic manager API's in ``rte_tm.h`` were mistakenly
>> made
>>    ABI stable in the v19.11 release. The TM maintainer and other contributors
>> have
>>    agreed to keep the TM APIs as experimental in expectation of additional
>> spec
>> --
>> 2.7.4
> We are going to introduce the more flexible format to descript the rx buffers
> with multiple segment lengths/pools. It might be worth to consider extending this
> info structure single field to array. I suppose it is the subject for further discussion (on RFC).

I saw your announcement about changing rxconf structure, and it looks interesting.
I am not sure if I need to mention this in v3?

> 
> Acked-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
> 
> 
> 
> .
>