DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "Vangati, Narender" <narender.vangati@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Eads, Gage" <gage.eads@intel.com>,
	"thomas.monjalon@6wind.com" <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] [PATCH v2] libeventdev: event driven programming model framework for DPDK
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2016 08:31:41 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161028030140.GA2967@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161026125414.GB33288@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 01:54:14PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 05:54:17PM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:11:03PM +0000, Van Haaren, Harry wrote:
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jerin Jacob
> Thanks. One other suggestion is that it might be useful to provide
> support for having typed queues explicitly in the API. Right now, when
> you create an queue, the queue_conf structure takes as parameters how
> many atomic flows that are needed for the queue, or how many reorder
> slots need to be reserved for it. This implicitly hints at the type of
> traffic which will be sent to the queue, but I'm wondering if it's
> better to make it explicit. There are certain optimisations that can be
> looked at if we know that a queue only handles packets of a particular
> type. [Not having to handle reordering when pulling events from a core
> can be a big win for software!].

If it helps in SW implementation, then I think we can add this in queue
configuration. 

> 
> How about adding: "allowed_event_types" as a field to
> rte_event_queue_conf, with possible values:
> * atomic
> * ordered
> * parallel
> * mixed - allowing all 3 types. I think allowing 2 of three types might
>     make things too complicated.
> 
> An open question would then be how to behave when the queue type and
> requested event type conflict. We can either throw an error, or just
> ignore the event type and always treat enqueued events as being of the
> queue type. I prefer the latter, because it's faster not having to
> error-check, and it pushes the responsibility on the app to know what
> it's doing.

How about making default as "mixed" and let application configures what
is not required?. That way application responsibility is clear.
something similar to ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_NOMULTSEGS, ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_NOREFCOUNT
with default.

/Jerin


> 
> /Bruce

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-28  3:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-04 21:49 [dpdk-dev] [RFC] " Vangati, Narender
2016-10-05  7:24 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-07 10:40   ` Hemant Agrawal
2016-10-09  8:27     ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-11 19:30   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC] [PATCH v2] " Jerin Jacob
2016-10-14  4:14     ` Bill Fischofer
2016-10-14  9:26       ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-14 10:30         ` Hemant Agrawal
2016-10-14 12:52           ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-14 15:00     ` Eads, Gage
2016-10-17  4:18       ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-17 20:26         ` Eads, Gage
2016-10-18 11:19           ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-14 16:02     ` Bruce Richardson
2016-10-17  5:10       ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-25 17:49     ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-26 12:11       ` Van Haaren, Harry
2016-10-26 12:24         ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-26 12:54           ` Bruce Richardson
2016-10-28  3:01             ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
2016-10-28  8:36               ` Bruce Richardson
2016-10-28  9:06                 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-11-02 11:25                   ` Jerin Jacob
2016-11-02 11:35                     ` Bruce Richardson
2016-11-02 13:09                       ` Jerin Jacob
2016-11-02 13:56                         ` Bruce Richardson
2016-11-02 14:54                           ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-26 18:37         ` Vincent Jardin
2016-10-28 13:10           ` Van Haaren, Harry
2016-11-02 10:47         ` Jerin Jacob
2016-11-02 11:45           ` Bruce Richardson
2016-11-02 12:34             ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-26 12:43       ` Bruce Richardson
2016-10-26 17:30         ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-28 13:48       ` Van Haaren, Harry
2016-10-28 14:16         ` Bruce Richardson
2016-11-02  8:59           ` Jerin Jacob
2016-11-02  8:06         ` Jerin Jacob
2016-11-02 11:48           ` Bruce Richardson
2016-11-02 12:57             ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-14 15:00 Francois Ozog

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=20161028030140.GA2967@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=gage.eads@intel.com \
    --cc=narender.vangati@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.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).