From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CECDC433FF for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 18:18:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31ADE2075B for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 18:18:15 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 31ADE2075B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=solarflare.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev-bounces@dpdk.org Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36C601B93E; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:18:14 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com (dispatch1-us1.ppe-hosted.com [67.231.154.164]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B13751B4B6 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 20:18:12 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Proofpoint Essentials engine Received: from webmail.solarflare.com (uk.solarflare.com [193.34.186.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1-us5.ppe-hosted.com (PPE Hosted ESMTP Server) with ESMTPS id 610D84C0068; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 18:18:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.11] (85.187.13.152) by ukex01.SolarFlarecom.com (10.17.10.4) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Tue, 6 Aug 2019 19:18:05 +0100 To: Matan Azrad , CC: Thomas Monjalon , Ferruh Yigit , Konstantin Ananyev , Olivier Matz , Maxime Coquelin References: <1565103383-23864-1-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> <1565103383-23864-2-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> From: Andrew Rybchenko Message-ID: <229e9a7b-2603-698c-d687-f7755f40bf58@solarflare.com> Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 21:17:58 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1565103383-23864-2-git-send-email-matan@mellanox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [85.187.13.152] X-ClientProxiedBy: ocex03.SolarFlarecom.com (10.20.40.36) To ukex01.SolarFlarecom.com (10.17.10.4) X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-12.5.0.1300-8.5.1010-24824.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No-9.144300-8.000000-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: 1GZI+iG+Mtc9gZmQY0RBhPZvT2zYoYOwC/ExpXrHizxDyQ/UxdRgsKEG Khm9baaN3dQkzWoJfYbS0mp2qhLdMVJN7bClZhyknMQdNQ64xff+paX6bXuNYcOtrkhuZC9WsVm 3YvAah+/fmhFTSILnRI9CL1e45ag4p6uK8TOJS3EL83u6Qud0gDFcf92WG8u/j4jFvt2M5IKLWW bQ06oKpoBs6iHlIlslDxqCgzkkKptwbhPS3psCFv3HILfxLV/9oZ0OlqS3oF8ZSz1vvG+0mvH+E rZATmt+8/Q6XR/jneKbGV2woY7yrf23St9LPiqzdhnFihmbnwXLRD51bz5RZE2ud/KXV9m/o8WM kQWv6iUD0yuKrQIMCAGLeSok4rrZC24oEZ6SpSmcfuxsiY4QFFSBUxUI4OQRAQyIQl57psBk1i8 nepSpYn4oQlFHZ7iA0kplwn2LQ1D21JXoNfaNhRT8ZyDyZ7c853ey3CYSIIRM4r0+7+F9OIfMZM egLDIeGU0pKnas+RbnCJftFZkZizYJYNFU00e7YDttQUGqHZU= X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: Yes X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No X-TMASE-Result: 10--9.144300-8.000000 X-TMASE-Version: SMEX-12.5.0.1300-8.5.1010-24824.003 X-MDID: 1565115492-MYT2O3ON5oY6 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] doc: announce new mbuf field for LRO X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 8/6/19 5:56 PM, Matan Azrad wrote: > The API breakage is because the ``tso_segsz`` field was documented for > LRO. > > The ``tso_segsz`` field in mbuf indicates the size of each segment in > the LRO packet in Rx path and should be provided by the LRO packet > port. > > While the generic LRO packet may aggregate different segments sizes in > one packet, it is impossible to expose this information for each segment > by one field and it doesn't make sense to expose all the segments sizes > in the mbuf. > > A new field may be added as union with the above field to expose the > number of segments aggregated in the LRO packet. > > Signed-off-by: Matan Azrad > --- > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > index c0cd9bc..e826b69 100644 > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > @@ -45,6 +45,10 @@ Deprecation Notices > - ``eal_parse_pci_DomBDF`` replaced by ``rte_pci_addr_parse`` > - ``rte_eal_compare_pci_addr`` replaced by ``rte_pci_addr_cmp`` > > +* mbuf: Remove ``tso_segsz`` mbuf field providing for LRO support. Use union > + block for the field memory to be shared with a new field ``lro_segs_n`` > + indicates the number of segments aggregated in the LRO packet. > + > * dpaa2: removal of ``rte_dpaa2_memsegs`` structure which has been replaced > by a pa-va search library. This structure was earlier being used for holding > memory segments used by dpaa2 driver for faster pa->va translation. This I think that the number of segments is more logical in the case of LRO. The question (already asked by Konstantin) is why it is needed at all (statistics?). If so, it still makes sense. Segment size is misleading here, since not all segments could be the same size. So, Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko As far as I can see bnxt and qede do not fill it in. mlx5 and vmxnet3 have the number of segments (vmxnet3 has segment size sometimes and sometimes use a function to guess the value). So both will win from the change. It looks like virtio does not have number of segments. CC Maxime to comment.