-----Original Message----- From: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> Date: Friday, March 30, 2018 at 6:47 AM To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Cc: Ajit Khaparde <[email protected]>, "Jacob, Jerin" <[email protected]>, "Thotton, Shijith" <[email protected]>, "Shukla, Santosh" <[email protected]>, Rahul Lakkireddy <[email protected]>, John Daley <[email protected]>, Wenzhuo Lu <[email protected]>, Konstantin Ananyev <[email protected]>, Beilei Xing <[email protected]>, Qi Zhang <[email protected]>, Jingjing Wu <[email protected]>, Adrien Mazarguil <[email protected]>, Nelio Laranjeiro <[email protected]>, Yongseok Koh <[email protected]>, Shahaf Shuler <[email protected]>, Tomasz Duszynski <[email protected]>, Jianbo Liu <[email protected]>, Alejandro Lucero <[email protected]>, Hemant Agrawal <[email protected]>, Shreyansh Jain <[email protected]>, Harish Patil <[email protected]>, "Mody, Rasesh" <[email protected]>, Andrew Rybchenko <[email protected]>, Shrikrishna Khare <[email protected]>, Maxime Coquelin <[email protected]>, Allain Legacy <[email protected]>, Bruce Richardson <[email protected]>, Gaetan Rivet <[email protected]>, Olivier Matz <[email protected]> Subject: Survey for final decision about per-port offload API
>There are some discussions about a specific part of the offload API: > "To enable per-port offload, the offload should be set on both > device configuration and queue setup." > >It means the application must repeat the port offload flags >in rte_eth_conf.[rt]xmode.offloads and rte_eth_[rt]xconf.offloads, >when calling respectively rte_eth_dev_configure() and >rte_eth_[rt]x_queue_setup for each queue. > >The PMD must check if there is mismatch, i.e. a port offload not >repeated in queue setup. >There is a proposal to do this check at ethdev level: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-March/094023.html > >It was also proposed to relax the API and allow "forgetting" port >offloads in queue offloads: > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-March/092978.html > >It would mean the offloads applied to a queue result of OR operation: > rte_eth_conf.[rt]xmode.offloads | rte_eth_[rt]xconf.offloads > >1/ Do you agree with above API change? Yes. But pls confirm that this would still work properly if RX supports port-only based offloads and doesn’t support queue based offloads at all, as advertised in dev_infos_get(). dev_info->rx_queue_offload_capa = 0 and dev_info->rx_offload_capa = (DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM | ...); > > >If we agree with this change, we need to update the documentation >and remove the checks in PMDs. >Note: no matter what is decided here, 18.05-rc1 should have all PMDs >switched to the API which was defined in 17.11. >Given that API is new and not yet adopted by the applications, >the sonner it is fixed, the better. > >2/ Should we do this change in 18.05-rc2? > Yes > >At the same time, we want to make clear that an offload enabled at >port level, cannot be disabled at queue level. > >3/ Do you agree with above statement (to be added in the doc)? Yes > > >There is the same kind of confusion in the offload capabilities: > rte_eth_dev_info.[rt]x_offload_capa > rte_eth_dev_info.[rt]x_queue_offload_capa >The queue capabilities must be a subset of port capabilities, >i.e. every queue capabilities must be reported as port capabilities. >But the port capabilities should be reported at queue level >only if it can be applied to a specific queue. > >4/ Do you agree with above statement (to be added in the doc)? Yes > > >Please give your opinion on questions 1, 2, 3 and 4. >Answering by yes/no may be sufficient in most cases :) >Thank you > >
