From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: Survey for final decision about per-port offload API
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2018 17:44:10 +0200
Message-ID: <2290922.gxAzXUSjGS@xps>
References: <2759953.P7QpFFSjiU@xps>
 <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E7061153177096@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>,
 Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Shijith Thotton <shijith.thotton@cavium.com>,
 Santosh Shukla <santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com>,
 Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>,
 John Daley <johndale@cisco.com>, "Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
 "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, "Xing,
 Beilei" <beilei.xing@intel.com>, "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
 Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>,
 Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>,
 Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>, Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
 Tomasz Duszynski <tdu@semihalf.com>, Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@arm.com>,
 Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>,
 Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
 Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>,
 Harish Patil <harish.patil@cavium.com>
To: "Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com
 [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C462AAF5
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon,  2 Apr 2018 17:45:34 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <039ED4275CED7440929022BC67E7061153177096@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

01/04/2018 03:51, Zhang, Qi Z:
> > 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?
> > 
> > 
> > If we agree with this change, we need to update the documentation and
> > remove the checks in PMDs.
> 
> Do you mean we will move offload check from PMD to ethdev, 
> or just remove specific check in each PMD
> or it is not in the scope of this vote?

By "remove the checks", I mean removing the checks in each PMD
for the port offloads repeated in queue offloads.