On 10/29/20 1:12 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 29/10/2020 11:08, Andrew Rybchenko:
>> On 10/29/20 12:27 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>>> During port configure or queue setup, the offload flags
>>> DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_TIMESTAMP and DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_SEND_ON_TIMESTAMP
>>> trigger the registration of the related mbuf field and flags.
>>>
>>> Previously, the Tx timestamp field and flag were registered in testpmd,
>>> as described in mlx5 guide.
>>> For the general usage of Rx and Tx timestamps,
>>> managing registrations inside ethdev is simpler and properly documented.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>
>>
>> A small note below, other than that
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>
>>
>>> +static inline int
>>> +eth_dev_timestamp_mbuf_register(uint64_t rx_offloads, uint64_t tx_offloads)
>>> +{
>>> + static const struct rte_mbuf_dynfield field_desc = {
>>> + .name = RTE_MBUF_DYNFIELD_TIMESTAMP_NAME,
>>> + .size = sizeof(rte_mbuf_timestamp_t),
>>> + .align = __alignof__(rte_mbuf_timestamp_t),
>>> + };
>>> + static const struct rte_mbuf_dynflag rx_flag_desc = {
>>> + .name = RTE_MBUF_DYNFLAG_RX_TIMESTAMP_NAME,
>>> + };
>>> + static const struct rte_mbuf_dynflag tx_flag_desc = {
>>> + .name = RTE_MBUF_DYNFLAG_TX_TIMESTAMP_NAME,
>>> + };
>>> + static bool done_rx, done_tx;
>>
>> I think we don't need these static flags. We can just repeat
>> registeration request and it will simply lookup and return
>> the same offset/flagbit as before.
>
> Absolutely.
> I did it as a small optimization in control path.
>
> I hesitated. Given it is only 2 booleans,
> do you prefer with or without or no opinion?
>
I'd prefer without it. It is always better without
static variables if possible.
