From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FEA81B967 for ; Thu, 10 May 2018 23:39:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 189132254B; Thu, 10 May 2018 17:39:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 10 May 2018 17:39:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=WR0B1fcXtYQKQWlA1zctKGW+bI YBVr3PXhl1UaS0RPA=; b=VixjkjJWHemr7PQZtiO+6J+vliVPoCGmuyw1VbLKnr SBrro08pVNOuF/gId8omRXHyglpk33miLfPvA6i2X+zpjRTnNA2niBaJtMi/x+is oJnHrCveEHMSULLYFfBtwz2P928glndKLMzmgSC1zDKCMV4QcKo/p0V2FegCUQs5 Y= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=WR0B1f cXtYQKQWlA1zctKGW+bIYBVr3PXhl1UaS0RPA=; b=jT/eHWa3C301+bAbuLDa+A HjTcawuTVPxlzYuYrSV6w6iQZ/JRGbajlJ7f+AuIA32OYNC65u3sdLQ0+DhHfmwb VnZ7NdFfH3UfOjaIUWjt8KAFKGIZSY6jKWBG5Ua8oG94rd5I9aLZOumum1Awv0WB MWodcBYdKCarRZ7qAKiqMb/ir1p68Wbep9Yjzu/e1vk605vW0BrF0E56j3kJ9RfY T1GMmi9s2VmsoNXAHeaVPsqK23rsIpdtCIboS+TetipGME00K3tIZ54Nt78zcPNu n0wNlScGkemIDb5R/owiMQh5Ae2hxUOVTOkUKIut5I1iH3JCEqY58UPg/CirQoDw == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 353BDE442F; Thu, 10 May 2018 17:39:36 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Wei Dai Cc: dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, Qi Zhang Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 23:39:34 +0200 Message-ID: <1576914.aDSgkB13uL@xps> In-Reply-To: <1525953415-14156-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> References: <1525951810-59300-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> <1525953415-14156-1-git-send-email-wei.dai@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12] ethdev: new Rx/Tx offloads API X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 21:39:37 -0000 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.