snipped
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I this README persistent in upcoming releases of 'driver/net/ice'?
> > > > > Yes.
> > > > If Linux driver is enabled in 4.20.1 or higher, then will the
> > > > wording 'This directory contains source code of FreeBSD ice driver
> > > > of' still
> > hold true?
> > > Although I don't understand why we talk about the Linux driver
> > > version, but I think the answer is yes.
> > Ok, reason for linux driver is because 1. you would be planning to
> > push the default kernel driver to linux for ICE.
> > 2. the documentation states FreeBSD 2018.10.30, so if there is future
> > enhancement pulled from linux driver this would added here too?
> Sure, we'll keep updating this code.
thanks
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > snipped
> > > > > > > +#define ICE_AQC_MAN_MAC_UPDATE_LAA 0
> > > > > > > +#define ICE_AQC_MAN_MAC_UPDATE_LAA_WOL (BIT(0) <<
> > > > > > > ICE_AQC_MAN_MAC_WR_S)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Can the code be rearranged for?
> > > > > We don’t want to change the base code for the sake of maintenance.
> > > > I do not follow this, is not your team or individual maintaining the
> > > > same?
> > > > because there should be maintainer for this PMD.
> > > This code is not implemented by us. You can take us as a
> > > representative of the develop team.
> > > If any bug, we'll hande it.
> > Ok, currently the team which maintains the code do not want to change
> > the order of code for sake of maintenance. Confusing approach, but I
> > leave this to other members to comment.
> >
> > >
> > > >
Snipped
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does the NIC support physical loopback? I am not able to find here.
> > > > > Not sure about it. But no plan for this at this stage.
> > > > Please add this in release note and PMD documentation the same.
> > > No, we list all the things done. It doesn't make sense to list
> > > everything not supported or not implemented.
> > I think it is necessary, because application 'testpmd' has option to
> > 'set tx loopback (port_id) (on|off)'. So If ICE DSI PMD does not
> > support it and in testpmd it fails both DTS team and DPDK user should
> > be made aware via documentation for limitation.
> If the feature is not supported, the not supported failure is returned.
> That's a RTE
> layer design and common solution for all the devices.
I am more concerned about DPDK error values and DTS. If DTS uses the loopback
as pass case it should pass and if it is feature not supported it should be
documented.
Note: In version 1 I enquired about unit or DTS validation for PMD. Is this
still holding good?
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +#define ICE_AQ_PHY_ENA_LOW_POWER BIT(2)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does Low Power PMD is exposed to DPDK? If yes, can you mention
> > > > > > the performance numbers or variance in Release documents?
> > > > > No plan for it at this release.
> > > > Would not it be better to not add here or update as comment and
> > > > release note about the same. Right now it is like dead code.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Snipped
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +/* Memory types */
> > > > > > > +enum ice_memset_type {
> > > > > > > + ICE_NONDMA_MEM = 0,
> > > > > > > + ICE_DMA_MEM
> > > > > > > +};
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > +/* Memcpy types */
> > > > > > > +enum ice_memcpy_type {
> > > > > > > + ICE_NONDMA_TO_NONDMA = 0,
> > > > > > > + ICE_NONDMA_TO_DMA,
> > > > > > > + ICE_DMA_TO_DMA,
> > > > > > > + ICE_DMA_TO_NONDMA
> > > > > > > +};
> > > > > > > +
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is this exposed to user (rte_eth_dev) API? If yes, can you
> > > > > > please let know the performance impact in RX|TX in release notes
> > > > > > too.
> > > > > No plan for it at this release.
> > > > Please update
> > > > a. what is difference least as comments.
> > > > b. in release notes about the same.
> > > >
> > > > snipped
