On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 10:20 AM Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo.bianconi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 19 Dec 2022 16:41:31 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > > +===================== > > > +Netdev XDP features > > > +===================== > > > + > > > + * XDP FEATURES FLAGS > > > + > > > +Following netdev xdp features flags can be retrieved over route netlink > > > +interface (compact form) - the same way as netdev feature flags. > > > > How likely is it that I'll be able to convince you that cramming more > > stuff in rtnl is a bad idea? I can convert this for you to a YAML- > > -compatible genetlink family for you in a jiffy, just say yes :S > > > > rtnl is hard to parse, and already overloaded with random stuff. > > And the messages are enormous. > > Hi Jakub, > > I am fine to use YAML for this, but I will let Marek comment since he is the > original author of this patch. > > > > > > +These features flags are read only and cannot be change at runtime. > > > + > > > +* XDP_ABORTED > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev supports xdp aborted action. > > > + > > > +* XDP_DROP > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev supports xdp drop action. > > > + > > > +* XDP_PASS > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev supports xdp pass action. > > > + > > > +* XDP_TX > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev supports xdp tx action. > > > + > > > +* XDP_REDIRECT > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev supports xdp redirect action. > > > +It assumes the all beforehand mentioned flags are enabled. > > > + > > > +* XDP_SOCK_ZEROCOPY > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev driver supports xdp zero copy. > > > +It assumes the all beforehand mentioned flags are enabled. > > > > Why is this "assumption" worth documenting? > > I guess we can remove it. > @Marek: any comment? > > > > > > +* XDP_HW_OFFLOAD > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev driver supports xdp hw oflloading. > > > + > > > +* XDP_TX_LOCK > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev ndo_xdp_xmit function requires locking. > > > > Why is it relevant to the user? > > Probably not, I kept it since it was in Marek's original patch. > @Marek: any comment? > > > > > > +* XDP_REDIRECT_TARGET > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev implements ndo_xdp_xmit callback. > > > > Does it make sense to rename XDP_REDIRECT -> XDP_REDIRECT_SOURCE then? > > yes, naming is always hard :) > > > > > > +* XDP_FRAG_RX > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev implements non-linear xdp buff support in > > > +the driver napi callback. > > > > Who's the target audience? Maybe FRAG is not the best name? > > Scatter-gather or multi-buf may be more widely understood. > > ack, fine. I will rename it in the formal series. > > Regards, > Lorenzo > > > > > > +* XDP_FRAG_TARGET > > > + > > > +This feature informs if netdev implements non-linear xdp buff support in > > > +ndo_xdp_xmit callback. XDP_FRAG_TARGET requires XDP_REDIRECT_TARGET is properly > > > +supported. > > Everybody is allowed to make a good use of it. Every improvement is highly appreciated. Thanks Lorenzo for taking this over. Regards Marek
