From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>, dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>,
Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>,
Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 11:10:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200806111008.1905c576@hermes.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM4PR05MB32656228031347414ECACD4CD2480@AM4PR05MB3265.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:03:31 +0000
Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 19:26
> > To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> > Cc: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
> > <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>; dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Matan Azrad
> > <matan@mellanox.com>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>;
> > Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; Andrew Rybchenko
> > <arybchenko@solarflare.com>; Ajit Khaparde
> > <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>; Maxime Coquelin
> > <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>; Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>;
> > David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure
> >
> > On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:58:22 +0100
> > Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 8/4/2020 2:32 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 6:36 PM Slava Ovsiienko
> > <viacheslavo@mellanox.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Hi, Jerin,
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for the comment, please, see below.
> > > >>
> > > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > > >>> From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
> > > >>> Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 14:57
> > > >>> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
> > > >>> Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>;
> > > >>> Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>; Thomas Monjalon
> > > >>> <thomas@monjalon.net>; Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>;
> > > >>> Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Andrew
> > Rybchenko
> > > >>> <arybchenko@solarflare.com>; Ajit Khaparde
> > > >>> <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>; Maxime Coquelin
> > > >>> <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>; Olivier Matz
> > > >>> <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; David Marchand
> > > >>> <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> > > >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf
> > > >>> structure
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 4:28 PM Viacheslav Ovsiienko
> > > >>> <viacheslavo@mellanox.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> The DPDK datapath in the transmit direction is very flexible.
> > > >>>> The applications can build multisegment packets and manages
> > > >>>> almost all data aspects - the memory pools where segments are
> > > >>>> allocated from, the segment lengths, the memory attributes like
> > external, registered, etc.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> In the receiving direction, the datapath is much less flexible,
> > > >>>> the applications can only specify the memory pool to configure
> > > >>>> the receiving queue and nothing more. In order to extend the
> > > >>>> receiving datapath capabilities it is proposed to add the new
> > > >>>> fields into rte_eth_rxconf structure:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> struct rte_eth_rxconf {
> > > >>>> ...
> > > >>>> uint16_t rx_split_num; /* number of segments to split */
> > > >>>> uint16_t *rx_split_len; /* array of segment lengthes */
> > > >>>> struct rte_mempool **mp; /* array of segment memory pools */
> > > >>>
> > > >>> The pool has the packet length it's been configured for.
> > > >>> So I think, rx_split_len can be removed.
> > > >>
> > > >> Yes, it is one of the supposed options - if pointer to array of
> > > >> segment lengths is NULL , the queue_setup() could use the lengths from
> > the pool's properties.
> > > >> But we are talking about packet split, in general, it should not
> > > >> depend on pool properties. What if application provides the single
> > > >> pool and just wants to have the tunnel header in the first dedicated
> > mbuf?
> > > >>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> This feature also available in Marvell HW. So it not specific to one
> > vendor.
> > > >>> Maybe we could just the use case mention the use case in the
> > > >>> depreciation notice and the tentative change in rte_eth_rxconf and
> > > >>> exact details can be worked out at the time of implementation.
> > > >>>
> > > >> So, if I understand correctly, the struct changes in the commit
> > > >> message should be marked as just possible implementation?
> > > >
> > > > Yes.
> > > >
> > > > We may need to have a detailed discussion on the correct abstraction
> > > > for various HW is available with this feature.
> > > >
> > > > On Marvell HW, We can configure TWO pools for given eth Rx queue.
> > > > One pool can be configured as a small packet pool and other one as
> > > > large packet pool.
> > > > And there is a threshold value to decide the pool between small and
> > large.
> > > > For example:
> > > > - The small pool is configured 2k
> > > > - The large pool is configured with 10k
> > > > - And if the threshold value is configured as 2k.
> > > > Any packet size <=2K will land in small pool and others in a large pool.
> > > > The use case, we are targeting is to save the memory space for jumbo
> > frames.
> > >
> > > Out of curiosity, do you provide two different buffer address in the
> > > descriptor and HW automatically uses one based on the size, or driver
> > > uses one of the pools based on the configuration and possible largest
> > > packet size?
> >
> > I am all for allowing more configuration of buffer pool.
> > But don't want that to be exposed as a hardware specific requirement in the
> > API for applications. The worst case would be if your API changes required:
> >
> > if (strcmp(dev->driver_name, "marvell") == 0) {
> > // make another mempool for this driver
> >
> I thought about adding some other segment attributes, vendor specific.
> We could describe the segments with some descriptor structure (size, pool)
> and add flags field to one. The proposals from other vendors are welcome.
>
Please no snowflake API's "are driver is special"...
Think of how it can fit into a general model.
Also, just because your hardware has a special feature does not mean
the DPDK has to support it!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-06 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-03 10:58 Viacheslav Ovsiienko
2020-08-03 11:56 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-08-03 13:06 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-04 13:32 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-08-05 6:35 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 15:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 16:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-08-06 16:41 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-08-06 17:03 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 18:10 ` Stephen Hemminger [this message]
2020-08-07 11:23 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-03 14:31 ` [dpdk-dev] ***Spam*** " Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-06 16:15 ` [dpdk-dev] " Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 16:29 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 16:37 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 16:39 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 16:43 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 16:48 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-05 8:49 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko
2020-08-05 11:14 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-06 12:39 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-08-06 21:42 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-08-06 16:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 17:00 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 16:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: fix the release notes for Mellanox PMD Viacheslav Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 17:12 ` Asaf Penso
2020-08-06 22:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-08-03 15:18 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-03 15:31 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-03 16:51 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-30 12:58 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-30 18:26 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-08-31 6:35 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-31 16:59 ` Stephen Hemminger
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=20200806111008.1905c576@hermes.lan \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \
--cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=matan@mellanox.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=rasland@mellanox.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=viacheslavo@mellanox.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).