From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22BFB8D99 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 15:14:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hmsreliant.think-freely.org ([2001:470:8:a08:7aac:c0ff:fec2:933b] helo=localhost) by smtp.tuxdriver.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1ZhHDi-0004Cp-3p; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:14:55 -0400 Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 09:14:48 -0400 From: Neil Horman To: Bruce Richardson Message-ID: <20150930131448.GA32524@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <1443445418-18498-1-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> <1443445418-18498-3-git-send-email-bernard.iremonger@intel.com> <20150929190812.GA3154@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20150930095603.GA10264@bricha3-MOBL3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150930095603.GA10264@bricha3-MOBL3> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-Spam-Status: No Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 02/20] librte_ether: add fields from rte_pci_driver to rte_eth_dev_data X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 13:14:57 -0000 On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 10:56:04AM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote: > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 03:08:12PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 02:03:20PM +0100, Bernard Iremonger wrote: > > > add dev_flags to rte_eth_dev_data, add macros for dev_flags. > > > add kdrv to rte_eth_dev_data. > > > add numa_node to rte_eth_dev_data. > > > add drv_name to rte_eth_dev_data. > > > use dev_type to distinguish between vdev's and pdev's. > > > remove pci_dev branches. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Bernard Iremonger > > > --- > > > lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------- > > > lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h | 15 ++++++++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > > > > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h > > > @@ -1635,8 +1635,23 @@ struct rte_eth_dev_data { > > > all_multicast : 1, /**< RX all multicast mode ON(1) / OFF(0). */ > > > dev_started : 1, /**< Device state: STARTED(1) / STOPPED(0). */ > > > lro : 1; /**< RX LRO is ON(1) / OFF(0) */ > > > + uint32_t dev_flags; /**< Flags controlling handling of device. */ > > > + enum rte_kernel_driver kdrv; /**< Kernel driver passthrough */ > > Why add this here? The ennumerated driver types are all variants on PCI bus > > types. Not sure why the ethernet interface needs to know this info > > > > > + int numa_node; > > Ditto, this seems like information that is only relevant if the device is on a > > physical bus (i.e. virual devices are likely to not have a numa node) > > > Actually, I disagree. For some virtual devices they will have a numa node. For > ring or other virtual PMDs the numa node will be the node on which the ring / > mempool etc. memory is allocated on, and can be of relevance. > > /Bruce > I think its fairly clear that some devices (including virtual ones) have some relevant relation to a numa_node (There are even some that have no numa_node, for which a -1 value makes some sense). That said, there are just as many that don't have a relevant numa_node. 1) There are some drivers for which numa_node make no sense (regardless of value): * af_packet - The numa node is at best determined at run time by the interface the socket is bound to * pcap - same as af_packet * bonding - multiple interfaces mean multiple numa_nodes, any value set here is just as likely to be wrong as right * mpipe - no real large memory area to associate with a numa node * virtio - uses iopl for communication, and cannot know its numa_node * vmxnet3 - same concept as virtio * xenvirt - same as vmxnet3 I think its better that you store numa locality information in a pmd's private bus data, and export it to applications via a device method. that provides the flexibility to tell the application that there is no numa locality for a device (by not implementing the method), without having to expose an unset data field to the application. Neil