From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Wei Dai <wei.dai@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12] ethdev: new Rx/Tx offloads API
Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 23:39:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1576914.aDSgkB13uL@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1525953415-14156-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com>
Hi,
A first general comment: a lot of spaces are still inside parens.
You can grep '( )'.
10/05/2018 13:56, Wei Dai:
> --- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/poll_mode_drv.rst
> +++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/poll_mode_drv.rst
> +A per-queue offloading can be enabled on a queue and disabled on another queue at the same time.
> +A pure per-port offload is the one supported by device but not per-queue type.
Another way to say it: pure per-port offloads are not directly advertised but
are the port offloads capabilities minus the queue capabilities.
port capabilities = pure per-port capabilities + queue capabilities
> +A pure per-port offloading can't be enabled on a queue and disabled on another queue at the same time.
> +A pure per-port offloading must be enabled or disabled on all queues at the same time.
> +Any offloading is per-queue or pure per-port type, but can't be both types at same devices.
> +A per-port offloading can be enabled or disabled on all queues at the same time.
This sentence is useless: it says any offload can be setup for the whole port.
> +It is certain that both per-queue and pure per-port offloading are per-port type.
This sentence is confusing. I cannot understand it.
> The different offloads capabilities can be queried using ``rte_eth_dev_info_get()``.
> +The dev_info->[rt]x_queue_offload_capa returned from ``rte_eth_dev_info_get()`` includes all per-queue offloading capabilities.
> +The dev_info->[rt]x_offload_capa returned from ``rte_eth_dev_info_get()`` includes all per-port and per-queue offloading capabilities.
If you want to stick with pure per-port wording, you should say
[rt]x_offload_capa is the port capabilities (including pure per-port and per-queue).
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.c
> + /* Any requested offloading must be within its device capabilities */
> + if ((local_conf.rxmode.offloads & dev_info.rx_offload_capa) !=
> + local_conf.rxmode.offloads) {
> + ethdev_log(ERR, "ethdev port_id=%d requested Rx offloads "
> + "0x%" PRIx64 " doesn't match Rx offloads "
> + "capabilities 0x%" PRIx64 " in %s( )\n",
> + port_id,
> + local_conf.rxmode.offloads,
> + dev_info.rx_offload_capa,
> + __func__);
We could have a comment saying that an error will be returned in next version.
> + }
> + if ((local_conf.txmode.offloads & dev_info.tx_offload_capa) !=
> + local_conf.txmode.offloads) {
> + ethdev_log(ERR, "ethdev port_id=%d requested Tx offloads "
> + "0x%" PRIx64 " doesn't match Tx offloads "
> + "capabilities 0x%" PRIx64 " in %s( )\n",
> + port_id,
> + local_conf.txmode.offloads,
> + dev_info.tx_offload_capa,
> + __func__);
idem
> + }
> + /*
> + * If an offloading has already been enabled in
> + * rte_eth_dev_configure(), it has been enabled on all queues,
> + * so there is no need to enable it in this queue again.
> + * The local_conf.offloads input to underlying PMD only carries
> + * those offloadings which are only enabled on this queue and
> + * not enabled on all queues.
> + * The underlying PMD must be aware of this point.
I think the last sentence is useless.
> + */
> + local_conf.offloads &= ~dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads;
> +
> + /*
> + * New added offloadings for this queue are those not enabled in
> + * rte_eth_dev_configure( ) and they must be per-queue type.
> + * A pure per-port offloading can't be enabled on a queue while
> + * disabled on another queue. A pure per-port offloading can't
> + * be enabled for any queue as new added one if it hasn't been
> + * enabled in rte_eth_dev_configure( ).
> + */
> + if ((local_conf.offloads & dev_info.rx_queue_offload_capa) !=
> + local_conf.offloads) {
> + ethdev_log(ERR, "Ethdev port_id=%d rx_queue_id=%d, new "
> + "added offloads 0x%" PRIx64 " must be "
> + "within pre-queue offload capabilities 0x%"
> + PRIx64 " in %s( )\n",
> + port_id,
> + rx_queue_id,
> + local_conf.offloads,
> + dev_info.rx_queue_offload_capa,
> + __func__);
idem, we can have a comment about error in next version
> + }
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev.h
> uint64_t rx_offload_capa;
> - /**< Device per port RX offload capabilities. */
> + /**< All RX offload capabilities including all per queue ones */
OK
per queue -> per-queue
> uint64_t tx_offload_capa;
> - /**< Device per port TX offload capabilities. */
> + /**< All TX offload capabilities.including all per-queue ones */
Typo: there is a dot instead of space.
> uint64_t rx_queue_offload_capa;
> /**< Device per queue RX offload capabilities. */
Here you should add more comments:
No need to repeat flags already enabled at port level.
A flag enabled at port level, cannot be disabled at queue level.
> + * - Any offloading set in eth_conf->[rt]xmode.offloads must be within
> + * the [rt]x_offload_capa returned from rte_eth_dev_infos_get().
OK
> + * Any type of device supported offloading set in the input argument
> + * eth_conf->[rt]xmode.offloads to rte_eth_dev_configure() is enabled
> + * on all [RT]x queues and it can't be disabled no matter whether
> + * it is cleared or set in the input argument [rt]x_conf->offloads
> + * to rte_eth_[rt]x_queue_setup().
last part can be simpler: cannot be disabled in queue setup.
"[RT]x queues" can be simply "queues".
> + * If an offloading set in rx_conf->offloads
> + * hasn't been set in the input argument eth_conf->rxmode.offloads
> + * to rte_eth_dev_configure(), it is a new added offloading, it must be
> + * per-queue type and it is enabled for the queue.
OK
Another wording:
The offloads not advertised in queue capabilities, and not already enabled
at port level, are rejected.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-10 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-01 13:53 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: check consistency of per port offloads Wei Dai
2018-03-28 8:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ethdev: check Rx/Tx offloads Wei Dai
2018-04-13 17:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-15 10:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-16 3:06 ` Dai, Wei
2018-04-25 11:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Wei Dai
2018-04-25 11:31 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Wei Dai
2018-04-25 11:49 ` Wei Dai
2018-04-25 11:50 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] " Wei Dai
2018-04-25 17:04 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-26 7:59 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2018-04-26 8:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-26 8:51 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2018-04-26 14:45 ` Dai, Wei
2018-04-26 14:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] " Wei Dai
2018-04-26 15:50 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-26 15:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-26 15:59 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-26 16:11 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-03 1:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] " Wei Dai
2018-05-04 11:12 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-04 14:02 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7] " Wei Dai
2018-05-04 14:42 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-04 14:45 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-05 18:59 ` Shahaf Shuler
2018-05-07 7:15 ` Dai, Wei
2018-05-08 10:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-08 10:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8] " Wei Dai
2018-05-08 10:41 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2018-05-08 11:02 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-08 11:22 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2018-05-08 11:37 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2018-05-08 12:34 ` Dai, Wei
2018-05-08 12:12 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-09 12:45 ` Dai, Wei
2018-05-10 0:49 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9] ethdev: new Rx/Tx offloads API Wei Dai
2018-05-10 0:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10] " Wei Dai
2018-05-10 1:28 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-10 2:35 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-05-10 11:27 ` Dai, Wei
2018-05-10 9:25 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2018-05-10 19:47 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-10 11:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11] " Wei Dai
2018-05-10 11:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12] " Wei Dai
2018-05-10 21:39 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2018-05-14 8:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-05-14 11:19 ` Dai, Wei
2018-05-10 21:48 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-14 12:00 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v13] " Wei Dai
2018-05-14 12:54 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-05-14 13:26 ` Dai, Wei
2018-05-14 13:20 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v14] " Wei Dai
2018-05-14 14:11 ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-05-14 14:46 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-10 21:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10] " Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-08 10:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8] ethdev: check Rx/Tx offloads Wei Dai
2018-05-08 17:51 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2018-05-09 2:10 ` Dai, Wei
2018-05-09 14:11 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-05-09 22:40 ` Ferruh Yigit
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1576914.aDSgkB13uL@xps \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=wei.dai@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).