On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 03:29:07PM +0000, Kulasek, TomaszX wrote: > Hi Konstantin, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin > > Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 15:03 > > To: Kulasek, TomaszX <tomaszx.kulasek at intel.com>; dev at dpdk.org > > Cc: jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation > > > > Hi Tomasz, > > > > > > > [...] > > > > + > > > +#ifdef RTE_ETHDEV_TX_PREP > > > > Sorry for being a bit late on that discussion, but what the point of > > having that config macro (RTE_ETHDEV_TX_PREP ) at all? > > As I can see right now, if driver doesn't setup tx_pkt_prep, then nb_pkts > > would be return anyway... > > > > BTW, there is my another question - should it be that way? > > Shouldn't we return 0 (and set rte_errno=ENOTSUP) here if dev->tx_pk_prep > > == NULL? > > > > It's an answer to the Jerin's request discussed here: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-September/046437.html > > When driver doesn't support tx_prep, default behavior is "we don't know > requirements, so we have nothing to do here". It will simplify application > logic and improve performance for these drivers, I think. Catching this error > with every burst may be problematic. > > As for RTE_ETHDEV_TX_PREP macro, suggested by Jerin in the same thread, I > still don't think It's the best solution of the problem described by him. I > have added it here for further discussion. > > Jerin, have you something to add?
Nothing very specific to add here. I think, I have tried to share the rational in, http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-September/046437.html > > Tomasz.
