[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] ethdev: introduce Tx queue offloads API

[Jerin Jacob]

-----Original Message-----
> Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:26:38 +0000
> From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> To: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko at solarflare.com>, Shahaf Shuler
>  <shahafs at mellanox.com>, Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>
> CC: Stephen Hemminger <stephen at networkplumber.org>, Thomas Monjalon
>  <thomas at monjalon.net>, "dev at dpdk.org" <dev at dpdk.org>, "Zhang, Helin"
>  <helin.zhang at intel.com>, "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu at intel.com>
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] ethdev: introduce Tx queue offloads
>  API
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Rybchenko [mailto:arybchenko at solarflare.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 11:28 AM
> > To: Shahaf Shuler <shahafs at mellanox.com>; Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob at caviumnetworks.com>
> > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>; Stephen Hemminger <stephen at networkplumber.org>; Thomas Monjalon
> > <thomas at monjalon.net>; dev at dpdk.org; Zhang, Helin <helin.zhang at intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu at intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] ethdev: introduce Tx queue offloads API
> > 
> > On 09/12/2017 11:03 AM, Shahaf Shuler wrote:
> > > OK, well understood the requirement for such flags. Thanks for your replies.
> > >
> > > I think that for simplicity I will add two more flags on the Tx offloads capabilities:
> > >
> > > DEV_TX_OFFLOADS _MULTI_MEMPOOL <** Device supports transmission of mbufs from multiple mempools. */
> > > DEV_TX_OFFLOADS_INDIRECT_MBUFS <** Device support transmission of indirect mbufs. */
> > 
> > Indirect mbufs is just an example when reference counters are required.
> > Direct mbufs may use reference counters as well.
> 
> Personally, I still in favor to move these 2 flags away from TX_OFFLOADS.
> But if people think it would be really helpfull to keep them, should we have then:
> DEV_TX_OFFLOADS_FAST_FREE (or whatever then name will be) - 
> it would mean the same what (NOMULTIMEMP | NOREFCOUNT) means now.

I am not too concerned about name. Yes. it should mean exiting (NOMULTIMEMP |
NOREFCOUNT)


> ?
> Konstsantin
> 
> > 
> > > Those caps can be reported by the PMD as per-port/per-queue offloads. Application will choose how to set those. When not set - PMD
> > can assume all mbufs has ref_cnt = 1 and the same mempool.
> > >
> > > Any objection?
> > 
>