From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C36B2C71 for ; Wed, 8 Mar 2017 12:25:51 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id t189so28074817wmt.1 for ; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 03:25:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BndJITXZbuz00+OLn8slhJC5urNskG06/UznHX7IiC0=; b=VQSk8SaXC+FRKLvOidbXVctuYR+2U/KGGnW3ZZAt1l2iPkhAAFL7008DJvF8wsrRLc V85FuhZK1RvjmIZK2QcoPSiw4Kro9Uyw4TwocKu31vmuE++1H683HcFWIkhXFiv8g8NJ qYXCZ7RxDSHrIJmltc9wiyOexUDAO3oydwzo6uZU2ZkTU2SFxHA1/r0TrI31i6MuEqIv VosWpRtBPw+8giUh3YBi5JOzbIYJZaoBp/VXdTd3oN0ZAgUPQcPYQs3/xJrt6UqJcrHM kPekrY6Q1wpdATyxjYicbtpWzw0D6w7QpDIKFYnue0sfO1O9pWj5G5xvTu+AvCn2mm1Z bs+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=BndJITXZbuz00+OLn8slhJC5urNskG06/UznHX7IiC0=; b=M5zVVbBsvqo8VS+9eiX1E0JuJH3iKbvV+lojQBHHKUtYOTcq+fv06fV94aI63hBkuq xHJY7oE4jIpzIQztmwaTCx/xgvKW85G2Y9UKMYbwvYZYQuuo5jjk4tr8rZIGSrSfp+3X jLTMEbVAr4OmpsWhyDW4XfE11g7QiROw+PZ1no2SvL71waK+hvSshz35aNfERPsg8n6n OS656bEp9l9tjXJ/V+OIsXQ7JiGNUe2SOpF4sO2TZWKgpRcJLt9hH9Goj/57GQ1vMsZ+ 0PxGZ5ku+YMbltnrBMUC+DsXWDKGM6vCMIXo5rO9nkH+rrmm37yDtZ8VnKxfPM3cE4Cn dsQg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39laI9QfLEExT2EoMPlKJRU90iGNf/290xQuv8BXs7d+KqY16I0deJQVEswMynrn0LA2 X-Received: by 10.28.165.70 with SMTP id o67mr4987792wme.11.1488972351261; Wed, 08 Mar 2017 03:25:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t30sm3761982wra.52.2017.03.08.03.25.50 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Mar 2017 03:25:50 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: "Wu, Jingjing" Cc: "Zhang, Helin" , "Mcnamara, John" , dev@dpdk.org, ferruh.yigit@intel.com Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 12:25:49 +0100 Message-ID: <17951395.s0M76qHr7t@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <6154321.GLCpcWPPOA@xps13> References: <32336171.7h5g7kEJXa@xps13> <9BB6961774997848B5B42BEC655768F810CDE4AF@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> <6154321.GLCpcWPPOA@xps13> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] i40e queues per VF 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: Wed, 08 Mar 2017 11:25:51 -0000 ping - still waiting for answers to below questions, please 2017-02-16 15:55, Thomas Monjalon: > 2017-02-16 13:58, Wu, Jingjing: > > From: Thomas Monjalon > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > When reading the documentation, it is not easy to understand the capability of > > > i40evf for the number of queues. > > > > > > First, please could you explain why we need a build-time config option? > > > In the doc, there is neither justification nor tuning guidelines: > > > > > > http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/nics/i40e.html#config-file-options > > > " > > > CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_I40E_QUEUE_NUM_PER_PF (default 64) Number of > > > queues reserved for PF. > > > CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_I40E_QUEUE_NUM_PER_VF (default 4) Number of > > > queues reserved for each SR-IOV VF. > > > " > > > > This number is used as initialization time to allocate queue number > > for PF/VF for HW's queue pool. Will add more description in i40e.rst. > > The description "Number of queues reserved for each SR-IOV VF" seems > partially wrong. Please explain it is a queue pair. > > > > I feel these are hard limits and should be some constants in the code, not some > > > build configuration options. > > > > > > The other doc to look at is: > > > http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/nics/intel_vf.html#intel-fortville-10-40-gigabit- > > > ethernet-controller-vf-infrastructure > > > " > > > Each VF can have a maximum of 16 queue pairs. > > > " > > > > > > Do we agree that a queue pair is 1 Rx queue / 1 Tx queue? > > > Note: the concept of queue pairs in Intel VF should be explained somewhere. > > > > > Yes. > > > Below, a different limitation is given: > > > " > > > The available queue number(at most 4) per VF depends on the total number of > > > pool, which is determined by the max number of VF at PF initialization stage and > > > the number of queue specified in config " > > > > > I think there may be some inconsistent description in doc intel_vf.rst due to > > Multiple kinds of NICs. We should correct them. > > Thanks for pointing that. > > > > > So what is the real maximum of queue pairs? 4 or 16? > > > The datasheet talks about 16 queues. Is it 8 pairs? > > > > That's is 16 queue pairs. 16 RX queues and 16 Tx queues. > > > > > > Is there something to configure the number of queues when creating VF with the > > > kernel driver? > > > > In kernel driver, it seems at most only 4 queues are supported. That's > > Why we add build-time config option to make more queues are possible. > > If we can create 16 queue pairs, why restrict the default configuration to 4? > Why is it a build-time config option?