diff mbox series

[2/2] doc: update MLX5 LRO limitation

Message ID 20221117143901.27957-2-getelson@nvidia.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded, archived
Delegated to: Raslan Darawsheh
Headers
Series [1/2] net/mlx5: fix port private max_lro_msg_size |

Checks

Context Check Description
ci/checkpatch success coding style OK
ci/loongarch-compilation success Compilation OK
ci/loongarch-unit-testing success Unit Testing PASS
ci/Intel-compilation success Compilation OK
ci/intel-Testing success Testing PASS
ci/iol-broadcom-Performance success Performance Testing PASS
ci/iol-mellanox-Performance success Performance Testing PASS
ci/iol-intel-Functional success Functional Testing PASS
ci/iol-intel-Performance success Performance Testing PASS
ci/iol-aarch64-unit-testing success Testing PASS
ci/github-robot: build success github build: passed
ci/iol-x86_64-compile-testing success Testing PASS
ci/iol-x86_64-unit-testing success Testing PASS
ci/iol-aarch64-compile-testing success Testing PASS

Commit Message

Gregory Etelson Nov. 17, 2022, 2:39 p.m. UTC 
  Maximal LRO message size must be multiply of 256.
Otherwise, TCP payload may not fit into a single WQE.

Cc: stable@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>
---
 doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

Comments

Thomas Monjalon Nov. 21, 2022, 3:23 p.m. UTC | #1 
17/11/2022 15:39, Gregory Etelson:
> Maximal LRO message size must be multiply of 256.
> Otherwise, TCP payload may not fit into a single WQE.
> 
> Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> Signed-off-by: Gregory Etelson <getelson@nvidia.com>
> Acked-by: Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>

Why the doc update is not in the same patch as the code change?

> @@ -278,6 +278,9 @@ Limitations
>  - No Tx metadata go to the E-Switch steering domain for the Flow group 0.
>    The flows within group 0 and set metadata action are rejected by hardware.
>  
> +- The driver rounds down the ``max_lro_pkt_size`` value in the port
> +  configuration to a multiple of 256 due to HW limitation.
> +
>  .. note::
>  
>     MAC addresses not already present in the bridge table of the associated

If you would like to read the doc, I guess you'd prefer to find this info
in the section dedicated to LRO, not in a random place.
Gregory Etelson Nov. 22, 2022, 5:17 a.m. UTC | #2 
Hello Thomas,

> >  .. note::
> >
> >     MAC addresses not already present in the bridge table of the
> associated
> 
> If you would like to read the doc, I guess you'd prefer to find this info
> in the section dedicated to LRO, not in a random place.
> 
I moved the patch location in v2

Regards,
Gregory
Thomas Monjalon Nov. 22, 2022, 8:25 a.m. UTC | #3 
22/11/2022 06:17, Gregory Etelson:
> Hello Thomas,
> 
> > >  .. note::
> > >
> > >     MAC addresses not already present in the bridge table of the
> > associated
> > 
> > If you would like to read the doc, I guess you'd prefer to find this info
> > in the section dedicated to LRO, not in a random place.
> > 
> I moved the patch location in v2

I've fixed v1 and merged yesterday. No need for v2.
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
index 4f0db21dde..98e0b24be4 100644
--- a/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst
@@ -278,6 +278,9 @@  Limitations
 - No Tx metadata go to the E-Switch steering domain for the Flow group 0.
   The flows within group 0 and set metadata action are rejected by hardware.
 
+- The driver rounds down the ``max_lro_pkt_size`` value in the port
+  configuration to a multiple of 256 due to HW limitation.
+
 .. note::
 
    MAC addresses not already present in the bridge table of the associated