24/09/2019 14:03, Matan Azrad: > From: Ferruh Yigit > > On 9/15/2019 8:48 AM, Matan Azrad wrote: > > > Hi Ferruh > > > > > > From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yi...@intel.com> > > >> On 8/29/2019 8:47 AM, Matan Azrad wrote: > > >>> It may be needed by the user to limit the LRO session packet size. > > >>> In order to allow the above limitation, add new Rx configuration for > > >>> the maximum LRO session size. > > >>> > > >>> In addition, Add a new capability to expose the maximum LRO session > > >>> size supported by the port. > > >>> > > >>> Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad <ma...@mellanox.com> > > >> > > >> Hi Matan, > > >> > > >> Is there any existing user of this new field? > > > > > > All the LRO users need it due to the next reasons: > > > > > > 1. If scatter is enabled - The dpdk user can limit the LRO session size > > > created > > by the HW by this field, if no field like that - there is no way to limit > > it. > > > 2. No scatter - the dpdk user may want to limit the LRO packet size in > > > order > > to save enough tail-room in the mbuf for its own usage. > > > 3. The limitation of max_rx_pkt_len is not enough - doesn't make sense to > > limit LRO traffic as single packet. > > > > > > > So should there be more complement patches to this RFC? To update the > > users of the field with the new field. > > > We already exposed it as ABI breakage in the last deprecation notice. > We probably cannot complete it for 19.11 version, hopefully for 20.02 it will > be completed.
We won't break the ABI in 20.02. What should be done in 19.11?
