[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/8] ethdev: reserve capability flags for PMD-specific API
tiwei.bie at intel.com
Tue Jan 10 03:08:23 CET 2017
On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 12:26:53PM +0100, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2017-01-09 11:57, Tiwei Bie:
> > On Sun, Jan 08, 2017 at 08:39:55PM +0800, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > > Well my first reply to this thread was asking why isn't the whole API global
> > > > from the start then?
> > >
> > > That's good question, and my preference would always be to have the
> > > API to configure this feature as generic one.
> > > I guess the main reason why it is not right now we don't reach an agreement
> > > how this API should look like:
> > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-September/047810.html
> > > But I'll leave it to the author to provide the real reason here.
> > Yes, currently this work just provided a thin layer over 82599's
> > hardware MACsec offload support to allow users configure 82599's
> > MACsec offload engine. The current API may be too specific and may
> > need a rework to be used with other NICs.
> I think it is a really good approach to start such API privately in a driver.
> It will give us more time and experience to design a proper generic API.
> Regarding the mbuf flag, it looks straight-forward, and as it is IEEE
> standardized, I do not see any objection to add it now.
> However, I will wait for the approval of Olivier - as maintainer of mbuf.
I see. Thank you very much for your comments! :-)
More information about the dev