From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F575A0562; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:44:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3F532C15; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:44:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 637D7F12; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:44:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024A15C05B2; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 11:43:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 31 Mar 2020 11:43:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=pmX12S+0NHLy486CR527yzrGw4FbSC1pkHVtRfaLscM=; b=fT6/RhMuhH4F yFDUF45OPOBwyqN1CHHNek+8hfx/dyRybwECi1xL5n0qi+DBOXW/oBScjyEAUsMx Rc0us4ydkjV8O0ggijNLlZxQLQsStr1Lov7l1fe4Pz8Td1RlryV2izaHm/pUu1YS HkUQIJ8mdW1BgTnHagNlHdQnsmSfEqY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=pmX12S+0NHLy486CR527yzrGw4FbSC1pkHVtRfaLs cM=; b=3CK67Y0DgFnw/GJtbAtfUNX6wJxjJQbDuO9YoFJ7pXhKO3nhEuZ76l82Z mMBJf3UQpo5H5Y+Xr9puWJqr6i97OzVP1GNKWtW37J3dIBZb8AWNGO+faQpbnsqg syKWFP/kRAAAee5EYZeB/9NnmVzxbHC1h7Hb48jD4iKag+Zrgc6+WiE8uTvPspfw VAFPhOrlVJVHBnCD71/zOF82y3lguaDDffqivlCcYhqcVZ+S6a834hGl1nJVPGl4 7Zm3Y8qy1d6DxZvjRCuJICdEOspU/6yAZrnPdveJGi9ZILKE+VrcbvS6WDe5vmDW eStZ7EEE9HkgukB90YjGWI+vhj1uQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedrtddtgdehlecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucffoh hmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfedrudekgeenucev lhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehthhhomhgrsh esmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 97FBD328005E; Tue, 31 Mar 2020 11:43:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Ferruh Yigit , Ajit Khaparde Cc: Stephen Hemminger , Lance Richardson , dpdk-dev , dpdk stable , Bruce Richardson , Andrew Rybchenko Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 17:43:55 +0200 Message-ID: <2306774.KokGdZ0ToA@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20200305064500.5634-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] net/bnxt: allow configuring vector mode X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 31/03/2020 16:31, Ajit Khaparde: > On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 4:36 AM Ferruh Yigit wrote: > > > On 3/5/2020 10:18 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > On Thu, 5 Mar 2020 15:10:48 -0500 > > > Lance Richardson wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Stephen, > > >> > > >> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 1:45 AM Stephen Hemminger > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > >> > > >>> > > >>> Make the configuration use the same as other drivers with > > >>> vector mode: ixge, i40e, ... > > >> s/ixge/ixgbe/? > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> This will also make future support of vector mode on other > > >>> architectures possible. > > >>> > > >>> Fixes: bc4a000f2f53 ("net/bnxt: implement SSE vector mode") > > >> > > >>> +#error "bnxt: IEEE1588 is incompatiable with vector mode" > > >>> +#endif > > >> s/incompatiable/incompatible/ > > >> > > >> > > >> This was this approach taken in the initial patch set to add bnxt > > >> vector mode support, > > >> however based on feedback the current approach was used instead. That > > discussion > > >> can be found here: > > >> http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/53683/ > > >> > > >> If mark support could be treated as a receive offload, it would be > > >> possible to choose > > >> the non-vector receive handler based on whether mark is enabled. Adding > > a kvargs > > >> option to disable vector mode might be another possibility. Otherwise, > > >> a build-time > > >> configuration option does seem to be useful. > > >> > > >> LGTM... with the above: > > >> > > >> Acked-by: Lance Richardson > > > > > > What ever solution must be consistent across all drivers. > > > > > > > I saw Ajit merged this patch to brcm tree, but I am not sure about it. We > > have > > already removed this compile time option from some PMDs, and driver tries > > to > > detect to use or not to use vectorization transparently. > > > > This config is also a problem for the meson, which always sets the flag in > > a > > hardcoded way. > > > > But also I am not sure about to need to enable/disable vectorization > > explicitly, > > this patch seems because of this need. As far as I remember in the past > > this > > type of runtime configuration rejected to not make driver configuration > > more > > complex. > > Since we need a way to disable or enable vector mode. Why do you need to disable vector optimization? Is it for debugging? > May be a dev parameter could be used? > That way it would not interfere with the meson builds and also allow a > user/application to set vector mode setting as desired. Yes diasbling optimization could be done in devargs.