[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/5] ethdev: add API to negotiate delivery of Rx meta data

[Ivan Malov]

Hi Ajit,

On 01/10/2021 00:48, Ajit Khaparde wrote:
> ::::
>> diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>> index 97ae52e17e..7a8da3d7ab 100644
>> --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>> +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
>> @@ -1485,10 +1485,36 @@ static void
>>   init_config_port_offloads(portid_t pid, uint32_t socket_id)
>>   {
>>          struct rte_port *port = &ports[pid];
>> +       uint64_t rx_meta_features = 0;
>>          uint16_t data_size;
>>          int ret;
>>          int i;
>>
>> +       rx_meta_features |= RTE_ETH_RX_META_USER_FLAG;
>> +       rx_meta_features |= RTE_ETH_RX_META_USER_MARK;
>> +       rx_meta_features |= RTE_ETH_RX_META_TUNNEL_ID;
>> +
>> +       ret = rte_eth_rx_meta_negotiate(pid, &rx_meta_features);
>> +       if (ret == 0) {
>> +               if (!(rx_meta_features & RTE_ETH_RX_META_USER_FLAG)) {
>> +                       TESTPMD_LOG(INFO, "Flow action FLAG will not affect Rx mbufs on port %u\n",
> Log level info might be a little too noisy?

Do you really think so? But main() sets default log level to DEBUG, quote:
     rte_log_set_level(testpmd_logtype, RTE_LOG_DEBUG);

If I go for DEBUG instead of INFO here, it won't get any quieter, will it?

> 
>> +                                   pid);
>> +               }
>> +
>> +               if (!(rx_meta_features & RTE_ETH_RX_META_USER_MARK)) {
>> +                       TESTPMD_LOG(INFO, "Flow action MARK will not affect Rx mbufs on port %u\n",
>> +                                   pid);
>> +               }
>> +
>> +               if (!(rx_meta_features & RTE_ETH_RX_META_TUNNEL_ID)) {
>> +                       TESTPMD_LOG(INFO, "Flow tunnel offload support might be limited or unavailable on port %u\n",
>> +                                   pid);
>> +               }
> :::
>>

-- 
Ivan M