Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 23:21:45 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 252984] qat(4): minor flaws Message-ID: <bug-252984-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D252984 Bug ID: 252984 Summary: qat(4): minor flaws Product: Documentation Version: Latest Hardware: amd64 OS: Any Status: New Severity: Affects Many People Priority: --- Component: Manual Pages Assignee: bugs@FreeBSD.org Reporter: walter.von.entferndt@posteo.net CC: doc@FreeBSD.org FYI the man page qat(4) misses to list some QAT-enabled CPUs/SoCs, e.g. some models of Xeon D-21xx also support it; I'm not sure about newer gen. 11 & l= ater Xeons. 2nd, IMHO the term "chipset" is inartfully expressed here, since these Xeon= D are SoC including a QAT logic circuit; from my limited understanding, this = has nothing to do with the chipset, but the QAT "device" is an independent logic circuit that either is added (& enabled) on the die or not. I would like to kindly suggest not to list all CPUs & SoCs that support QAT, since this is a moving target. Instead, a wording like "...on all systems = that supprt QAT or have an external QAT device (add-on card).". Additionally, i= t is helpful to include a hint how to get that information, like this: "Systems supporting QAT include the term QAT in their CPU features. It can be check= ed e.g. On the command line or shell script: grep -E 'Features.+QAT' /var/run/dmesg.boot In a program with the C-library function [...]". A note on the 1st command: IIRC the system messages are stored in a circular buffer, so the CPU features fetched at boot time might have been scrolled o= ut off the buffer when using the dmesg(8) utility. I'm not a native english speaker, thus I do not send a patch but leave it u= p to you to find a good wording. Regards --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-252984-227>