[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: add enum type for loop on Rx/Tx offloads

[Dai, Wei]

Thanks Zhang Qi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zhang, Qi Z
> Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 10:24 PM
> To: Dai, Wei <wei.dai at intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>; thomas at monjalon.net
> Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: add enum type for loop on Rx/Tx
> offloads
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces at dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Dai, Wei
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 10:09 PM
> > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>;
> > thomas at monjalon.net
> > Cc: dev at dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: add enum type for loop on
> > Rx/Tx offloads
> >
> > Hi, Konstantin
> > Thanks for your feedback.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 8:00 PM
> > > To: Dai, Wei <wei.dai at intel.com>; thomas at monjalon.net
> > > Cc: dev at dpdk.org; Dai, Wei <wei.dai at intel.com>
> > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: add enum type for loop on
> > > Rx/Tx offloads
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi Wei,
> > >
> > > >
> > > > This patch adds enum rte_eth_rx_offload_type and enum
> > > > rte_eth_tx_offload_type. For a loop on all Rx offloads, it is
> > > > convenient to begin with the first enum member
> > > > ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE and to end at
> > > ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM.
> > > > A loop on all Tx offloads can begin with
> > > ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE
> > > > and end at ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Wei Dai <wei.dai at intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h | 44
> > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 44 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> > > > b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h index 0361533..0089ea3 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> > > > +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> > > > @@ -946,6 +946,27 @@ struct rte_eth_conf {
> > > >  			     DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_FILTER | \
> > > >  			     DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_EXTEND)
> > > >
> > > > +enum rte_eth_rx_offload_type {
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE = 0,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_STRIP =
> ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_LRO,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_QINQ_STRIP,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_IPV4_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_MACSEC_STRIP,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_FILTER,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_EXTEND,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_CRC_STRIP,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TIMESTAMP,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY,
> > > > +	ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > >  /*
> > > >   * If new Rx offload capabilities are defined, they also must be
> > > >   * mentioned in rte_rx_offload_names in rte_ethdev.c file.
> > > > @@ -981,6 +1002,29 @@ struct rte_eth_conf {
> > > >   */
> > > >  #define DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY         0x00020000
> > > >
> > > > +enum rte_eth_tx_offload_type {
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE = 0,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VLAN_INSERT =
> > ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_FIRST_FEATURE,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPV4_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_SCTP_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TCP_TSO,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_UDP_TSO,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_OUTER_IPV4_CKSUM,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_QINQ_INSERT,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_VXLAN_TNL_TSO,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GRE_TNL_TSO,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_IPIP_TNL_TSO,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_GENEVE_TNL_TSO,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MACSEC_INSERT,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MT_LOCKFREE,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MULTI_SEGS,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_MBUF_FAST_FREE,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_SECURITY,
> > > > +	ETH_TX_OFFLOAD_TOTAL_NUM
> > > > +};
> > >
> > > What is the purpose to introduce  these enums?
> > > It looks like they are not used anywhere?
> > > Konstantin
> >
> > When I make the patch for new offloading test with testpmd, I find I
> > need loop on all possible offloads, without this enum type, I have to
> > loop from bit 0 to bit 63, I think it is better to stop at the last one and No
> need to bit 63.
> > I guess it will be helpful for some future application which need loop
> > on all offloadings.
> 
> If you want to know the total offload count, You can just create an api like
> rte_eth_get_xx_offload_count to reuse the rte_xx_offload_names So we
> don't need maintain same information in two place, But still, in your testpmd,
> I saw the loop will break at first UNKNOWN, so loop from 0 to 63 is still no
> waste, am I right?
> maybe you need to give a better example for why we need this
> 
> Regards
> Qi
> 
Yes, you are right. 
I will withdraw this patch.
> >
> > >
> > > > +
> > > >  /*
> > > >   * If new Tx offload capabilities are defined, they also must be
> > > >   * mentioned in rte_tx_offload_names in rte_ethdev.c file.
> > > > --
> > > > 2.7.5