> On 25.01.23 01:33, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > > From: Marek Majtyka <alardam@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > A summary of the flags being set for various drivers is given below. > > Note that XDP_F_REDIRECT_TARGET and XDP_F_FRAG_TARGET are features > > that can be turned off and on at runtime. This means that these flags > > may be set and unset under RTNL lock protection by the driver. Hence, > > READ_ONCE must be used by code loading the flag value. > > > > Also, these flags are not used for synchronization against the availability > > of XDP resources on a device. It is merely a hint, and hence the read > > may race with the actual teardown of XDP resources on the device. This > > may change in the future, e.g. operations taking a reference on the XDP > > resources of the driver, and in turn inhibiting turning off this flag. > > However, for now, it can only be used as a hint to check whether device > > supports becoming a redirection target. > > > > Turn 'hw-offload' feature flag on for: > > - netronome (nfp) > > - netdevsim. > > > > Turn 'native' and 'zerocopy' features flags on for: > > - intel (i40e, ice, ixgbe, igc) > > - mellanox (mlx5). > > - stmmac > > > > Turn 'native' features flags on for: > > - amazon (ena) > > - broadcom (bnxt) > > - freescale (dpaa, dpaa2, enetc) > > - funeth > > - intel (igb) > > - marvell (mvneta, mvpp2, octeontx2) > > - mellanox (mlx4) > > - qlogic (qede) > > - sfc > > - socionext (netsec) > > - ti (cpsw) > > - tap > > - veth > > - xen > > - virtio_net. > > > > Turn 'basic' (tx, pass, aborted and drop) features flags on for: > > - netronome (nfp) > > - cavium (thunder) > > - hyperv. > > > > Turn 'redirect_target' feature flag on for: > > - amanzon (ena) > > - broadcom (bnxt) > > - freescale (dpaa, dpaa2) > > - intel (i40e, ice, igb, ixgbe) > > - ti (cpsw) > > - marvell (mvneta, mvpp2) > > - sfc > > - socionext (netsec) > > - qlogic (qede) > > - mellanox (mlx5) > > - tap > > - veth > > - virtio_net > > - xen > > XDP support for tsnep was merged to net-next last week. So this driver > cannot get XDP feature support in bpf-next as it is not there currently. > Should I add these flags with a fix afterwards? Or would net-next be the > better target for this patch series? It is better to target this series to bpf-next I guess since there are some libbpf and bpf changes. I would say we can fix tsnep with a follow-up patch or I can add it to the series if bpf-next will be rebased before the series is merged, it depends on the upstream discussion. Regards, Lorenzo > > Gerhard
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
