29/10/2020 11:33, Andrew Rybchenko:
> 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.
I liked the naming of variables "todo" and "done"
but I will do what is preferred.
If nobody objects, I will remove this small (useless) optimization.
