-----Original Message----- From: Thomas Monjalon <[email protected]> Date: Monday, April 2, 2018 at 1:10 PM To: Harish Patil <[email protected]> Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, 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]>, "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: Re: Survey for final decision about per-port offload API
>02/04/2018 19:39, Patil, Harish: >> >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 | ...); > >Yes, of course, no queue offload at all is possible. > Okay, thanks. >
