DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>,
	"Dumitrescu, Cristian" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
Cc: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org>,
	Nithin Dabilpuram <nithind1988@gmail.com>,
	"Singh, Jasvinder" <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>,
	Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"jerinj@marvell.com" <jerinj@marvell.com>,
	"kkanas@marvell.com" <kkanas@marvell.com>,
	Nithin Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>,
	"Kinsella, Ray" <ray.kinsella@intel.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	Kevin Traynor <ktraynor@redhat.com>,
	David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add tm support for shaper config in pkt mode
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 17:54:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1923738.gORTcIGjah@thomas> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19c8b69f68bcdb7ac23126e63456223f7aff0465.camel@debian.org>

28/04/2020 17:04, Luca Boccassi:
> On Tue, 2020-04-28 at 15:45 +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 03:06:20PM +0100, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> > > On 4/27/2020 5:59 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 10:19 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > On 4/27/2020 5:29 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 9:42 PM Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On 4/27/2020 10:19 AM, Dumitrescu, Cristian wrote:
> > > > > > > > From: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> > > > > > > > > On 4/24/2020 11:28 AM, Dumitrescu, Cristian wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > From: Nithin Dabilpuram <nithind1988@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > > This patch also updates tm port/level/node capability structures with
> > > > > > > > > > > exiting features of scheduler wfq packet mode, scheduler wfq byte mode
> > > > > > > > > > > and private/shared shaper byte mode.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > SoftNIC PMD is also updated with new capabilities.
[...]
> > > > > > > > > Hi Nithin,
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > It looks like patch is causing ABI break, I am getting following warning [1],
> > > > > > > > > can you please check?
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > [1]
> > > > > > > > > https://pastebin.com/XYNFg14u
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Hi Ferruh,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > The RTE_TM API is marked as experimental,
> > > > > > > > but it looks that this was not correctly marked
> > > > > > > > when __rte_experimental ABI checker was introduced.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > It is marked as experimental at the top of the rte_tm.h,
> > > > > > > > similarly to other APIs introduced around same time,
> > > > > > > > but it was not correctly picked up by the ABI check procedure
> > > > > > > > when later introduced, so __rte_experimental was not added to every function.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > :(
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Is it time to mature them?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > As you said they are not marked as experimental both in header file (function
> > > > > > > declarations) and .map file.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The problem is, they are not marked as experimental in DPDK_20.0 ABI (v19.11),
> > > > > > > so marking them as experimental now will break the ABI. Not sure what to do,
> > > > > > > cc'ed a few ABI related names for comment.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > For me, we need to proceed as the experimental tag removed and APIs become
> > > > > > > mature starting from v19.11, since this is what happened in practice, and remove
> > > > > > > a few existing being experimental references in the doxygen comments.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I think, accidentally we can not make a library as NON-experimental.
> > > > > > TM never went through experimental to mature transition(see git log
> > > > > > lib/librte_ethdev/rte_tm.h)
> > > > > > It was a bug to not mark as experimental in each function in the ABI process.
> > > > > > Some of the features like packet marking are not even implemented by any HW.
> > > > > > I think, we can make API stable only all the features are implemented
> > > > > > by one or two HW.

Yes this is what was decided one or two years ago I think.
But rte_tm API was introduced 3 years ago and is implemented by 6 PMDs.



> > > > > Fair enough, specially if the API is not ready yet.
> > > > > 
> > > > > But they were part of stable ABI, and marking them as experimental now will
> > > > > break the old applications using these APIs.
> > > > 
> > > > it is still marked as EXPERIMENTAL everywhere and API is not ready yet.

rte_tm is implemented in 6 PMDs.


> > > Existing experimental marks are text only for human parsing.
> > > 
> > > The compiler attribute and build time checks are missing, and the symbol in the
> > > binary doesn't have experimental tag. Our scripts and automated checks won't
> > > detect it as experimental.
> > > 
> > > My point is just having experimental comment in header file is not enough to
> > > qualify the APIs as experimental.
> > > 
> > > > Anyway, we need to break the ABI to make it work on various HW.

Yes this is why I was asking in 19.11 to check our API,
in order to avoid such situation.


> > > > I am not sure what to do?

Either manage ABI versioning, or wait 20.11.


> > > > IMO, We need to send a patch as Fixes: for the bug of not adding
> > > > __rte_experimental in each function.

No, this is wrong.


> > > Yes, this is where we are, both you and Cristian suggest API is not ready and
> > > should be experimental, but they were part of stable ABI, making them
> > > experimental will break the ABI.
> > > It looks like there is no good option but we should select one of the bad ones.
> > > 
> > > > Traffic Management API - EXPERIMENTAL
> > > > M: Cristian Dumitrescu <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>
> > > > T: git://dpdk.org/next/dpdk-next-qos
> > > > F: lib/librte_ethdev/rte_tm*
> > > > > > > Ray, Neil, David, Luca, Kevin, what do you think?
> > While I'm not called any of those names, allow me to give my 2c.
> > 
> > Since these are marked in binaries as part of the stable ABI, I think we
> > need to honour that for the next two releases 20.05 and 20.08 [which means
> > that we need to put in versioned functions for any changes, not that we
> > can't change anything]
> > 
> > For 20.11, I think these should then have one of two options taken:
> > * have these "fixed" and ready to be marked as stable, and officially part
> >   of v21 ABI or
> > * mark them as experimental properly, and look to have them as part of the
> >   v22 or subsequent ABI
> > 
> > Given the comments here, I would tend towards the latter of the above two
> > options, but that's really a decision for the maintainers.
> > 
> > Remember, this is not the first bug we have encountered where we messed up
> > some ABI versions in the 19.11 release, and, like the previous one with the
> > screwed up version number, I think we need to honour the ABI committments
> > made, especially since in this case it's only for a few more months till
> > 20.11 development starts.
> > 
> > /Bruce
> 
> +1
> 
> If they are not ready now, they haven't been ready for the past 6
> months either, so staying not ready for 6 more is the lesser evil.

This API is almost 3 years old (release 17.08).
That's good to improve it but we must respect the ABI contract that
we all agreed.


Summary:
17.08: rte_tm is introduced.
17.11: rte_mtr is introduced as experimental, but rte_tm remains stable.
18.02: __rte_experimental tag is introduced (including for rte_mtr),
but rte_tm remains untouched as it is in stable ABI.
19.11: stable ABI is frozen until 20.11
20.05: rte_tm improvement is blocked because of ABI breakage.


It should remind everybody of reviewing the new API and policies,
and maintaining the existing code appropriately.



  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-28 15:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-30 16:00 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] ethdev: add tm cap for private shaper packet mode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-03-30 16:00 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] app/testpmd: add tm non leaf node pktmode command Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-07  7:30 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] ethdev: add tm cap for private shaper packet mode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-07 16:31 ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-07 17:21   ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-10 11:45     ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-10 11:56       ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-11 11:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] ethdev: add tm support for shaper config in pkt mode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-11 11:44   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] drivers/net: update tm capability for existing pmds Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-11 11:44   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] app/testpmd: add tm cmd for non leaf and shaper pktmode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-11 11:44   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] net/octeontx2: support tm length adjust and pkt mode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-16 13:48   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] ethdev: add tm support for shaper config in " Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-21  5:11     ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-21  9:30   ` [dpdk-dev] " Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-21  9:58     ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-21 10:23       ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-21 11:55         ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22  7:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22  7:59   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] drivers/net: update tm capability for existing pmds Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22  7:59   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] app/testpmd: add tm cmd for non leaf and shaper pktmode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22  7:59   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] net/octeontx2: support tm length adjust and pkt mode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22  8:09   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] ethdev: add tm support for shaper config in " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 12:18     ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-04-22 17:21       ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 10:10   ` [dpdk-dev] " Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-22 11:31     ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 11:49       ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 11:59         ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-22 12:01       ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-22  8:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 17:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 17:21   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] drivers/net: update tm capability for existing pmds Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 17:21   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] app/testpmd: add tm cmd for non leaf and shaper pktmode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-22 17:21   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] net/octeontx2: support tm length adjust and pkt mode Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-24 10:28   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/4] ethdev: add tm support for shaper config in " Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-25 20:09     ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-27  9:19       ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-27 16:12         ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-27 16:28           ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-28 15:30             ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-04-28 17:35               ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-27 16:29           ` Jerin Jacob
2020-04-27 16:49             ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-27 16:59               ` Jerin Jacob
2020-04-28 11:51                 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-04-28 13:56                   ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-28 14:06                 ` [dpdk-dev] " Ferruh Yigit
2020-04-28 14:45                   ` Bruce Richardson
2020-04-28 15:04                     ` Luca Boccassi
2020-04-28 15:54                       ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2020-04-29  8:45                         ` Dumitrescu, Cristian
2020-04-29  9:03                           ` Bruce Richardson
2020-05-01 10:27                             ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-01 13:16                               ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-08-25 16:59                                 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-09-07 11:12                                   ` Nithin Dabilpuram
2020-09-14 13:01                                     ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-01 13:18                         ` [dpdk-dev] " Jerin Jacob
2020-05-05  8:01                           ` Ray Kinsella
2020-04-28 15:42                     ` Ray Kinsella

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=1923738.gORTcIGjah@thomas \
    --to=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
    --cc=bluca@debian.org \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=jasvinder.singh@intel.com \
    --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
    --cc=kkanas@marvell.com \
    --cc=ktraynor@redhat.com \
    --cc=ndabilpuram@marvell.com \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=nithind1988@gmail.com \
    --cc=ray.kinsella@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).