From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C71EA3160 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:42:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D41B51E8B7; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:42:19 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B491BF6C for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:42:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E613210DC; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 03:42:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 10 Oct 2019 03:42:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=FfrZn1wDxluJpYMIs4aahOq1WbmfWie3yI1IQkgIF8A=; b=gfxvbBRgXVL0 uglU2GHl77CwiZ3Wj1KLiIZUXctBod6SvbZlxMQ2CCDOpUHu+LJ/M5KJnK3f0Wdy bbz4iGmo2YCeV5p4g/CZTu9r0YRLgGuGnuUZppY5bfGvwvXTMv+C/qwt66QxuBxg r3eSz1hKiFKjXpSMz0iTkpMtzoSlg5Q= 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-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=FfrZn1wDxluJpYMIs4aahOq1WbmfWie3yI1IQkgIF 8A=; b=krvxmQTz9nMwjpGn2LxDb2Rio1S7zRSyy01EwXYqD/IA7IEJO5R+/oA26 v/lgmhPBbjUhAXSh9uFh0G3do+UX47bnnjjEjhiMqby5p8O96moV5G8XznH/MQiF wRa7i5fWv4AUAZoXQ8gp5X8g+yxDIAj+NmgVKk/u97wYaLc8qkgt+coiUSVYppQy mgHvYjZh+AwCHiQV4PNGPflYk1cDKeZ+qeBUTvWpVGcuzMww8aMyLCn07/JkcnJ+ P1LoW7O1tqAQexvkU1oj5Ll2IEEydDLSm/mHktGRN3GTXK5dx8VVW7WsvgaBzHIf rcUNzMe0nWWCMILa2ZZ2kU7FM6CBg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedriedvgdduvdeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfhgggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgr shcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceothhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecuff homhgrihhnpehgihhthhhusgdrtghomhenucfkphepjeejrddufeegrddvtdefrddukeeg necurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvg htnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B6363D6005F; Thu, 10 Oct 2019 03:42:16 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Andrew Rybchenko , Tiwei Bie , Ferruh Yigit Cc: Maxime Coquelin , Zhihong Wang , dev@dpdk.org, Dilshod Urazov Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2019 09:42:15 +0200 Message-ID: <1888011.E2VOWpukML@xps> In-Reply-To: <97813cf0-78c1-8ff3-5b36-b3423a9141ce@solarflare.com> References: <1569944672-24754-1-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com> <20191009104143.GA14695@___> <97813cf0-78c1-8ff3-5b36-b3423a9141ce@solarflare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] net/virtio: reject unsupported Rx multi queue modes 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 09/10/2019 13:24, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 10/9/19 1:41 PM, Tiwei Bie wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:00:28PM +0300, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > >> And one more thought... > >> It looks like if more than one Rx queue is configured, mq_mode must > >> be ETH_MQ_RX_RSS and must not be ETH_MQ_RX_NONE. > > Some apps in DPDK will set mq_mode to ETH_MQ_RX_NONE while > > enabling multiple queue pairs, e.g.: > > > > https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/blob/5b5bb56532fd5dea5d6260c0a0e405c0e32da2a0/app/test/test_link_bonding.c#L137 > > https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/blob/5b5bb56532fd5dea5d6260c0a0e405c0e32da2a0/app/test/test_link_bonding.c#L181-L182 > > https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/blob/5b5bb56532fd5dea5d6260c0a0e405c0e32da2a0/app/test/test_link_bonding.c#L3938-L3948 > > > > Testpmd will also set mq_mode to ETH_MQ_RX_NONE when multiple > > Rx queues are enabled but rss_hf is empty: > > > > https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/blob/5b5bb56532fd5dea5d6260c0a0e405c0e32da2a0/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c#L2935-L2938 > > https://github.com/DPDK/dpdk/blob/5b5bb56532fd5dea5d6260c0a0e405c0e32da2a0/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c#L2945-L2948 > > (the flow_type_rss_offloads reported by virtio-PMD is zero) > > > > My understanding is that, setting mq_mode to ETH_MQ_RX_NONE means > > no method is enforced on how to route packets to MQs. > > I'm not sure. It is definitely a place to be improved in > ethdev documentation. Thomas, Ferruh, what do you think? > Is it really a definition of ETH_MQ_RX_NONE? I think it means everything go to queue 0. The comment says no DCB, RSS or VMDQ. It looks like the "NONE" value has been abused for some custom steering. We have two options: - document NONE as a possible case of custom steering - add a new CUSTOM value