From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, bruce.richardson@intel.com,
harry.van.haaren@intel.com, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com,
gage.eads@intel.com, nipun.gupta@nxp.com,
santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] ethdev: add lock-less txq capability flag
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 14:34:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1937111.PEUejtoCqE@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170421122223.24194-1-jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
21/04/2017 14:22, Jerin Jacob:
> if this flag is advertised by a PMD, Multiple threads can
> invoke rte_eth_tx_burst() concurrently on the same tx queue
> without SW lock. This is an HW feature found in some NICs
> and useful in the following use cases if HW supports it.
Which hardware supports it?
[...]
> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> +#define DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_TXQ_MT_LOCKFREE 0x00004000
> +/**< Multiple threads can invoke rte_eth_tx_burst() concurrently on the
> same + * tx queue without SW lock.
> + */
Why TXQ in the name? DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MT_LOCKFREE would be enough.
I wonder whether "lock free" wording is confusing because
the locks are probably handled in HW.
I think the good wording is "offloaded multi-thread capability",
maybe with a naming like DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MT.
Anyway we should reference this flag in rte_eth_tx_burst()
and give more details in doc/guides/prog_guide/poll_mode_drv.rst.
Should we wait a first hardware PoC to add this flag?
Candidate for 17.08?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-24 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-21 12:22 Jerin Jacob
2017-04-24 12:34 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2017-04-27 11:00 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-07-05 17:46 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-07-06 6:00 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-07-06 6:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] ethdev: introduce lock-free " Jerin Jacob
2017-07-08 16:08 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-07-10 16:56 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-07-10 16:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 ] " Jerin Jacob
2017-07-13 12:02 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-07-18 13:43 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-07-13 18:42 ` santosh
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=1937111.PEUejtoCqE@xps \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=gage.eads@intel.com \
--cc=harry.van.haaren@intel.com \
--cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
--cc=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=nipun.gupta@nxp.com \
--cc=santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.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).