From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> To: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>, "Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>, Dekel Peled <dekelp@mellanox.com>, "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>, "Kovacevic, Marko" <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>, "nhorman@tuxdriver.com" <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, "ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com" <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>, "somnath.kotur@broadcom.com" <somnath.kotur@broadcom.com>, "Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>, "xuanziyang2@huawei.com" <xuanziyang2@huawei.com>, "cloud.wangxiaoyun@huawei.com" <cloud.wangxiaoyun@huawei.com>, "zhouguoyang@huawei.com" <zhouguoyang@huawei.com>, "Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>, Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>, Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>, "rmody@marvell.com" <rmody@marvell.com>, "shshaikh@marvell.com" <shshaikh@marvell.com>, "maxime.coquelin@redhat.com" <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>, "Bie, Tiwei" <tiwei.bie@intel.com>, "Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com>, "yongwang@vmware.com" <yongwang@vmware.com>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, "arybchenko@solarflare.com" <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, "Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>, "Iremonger, Bernard" <bernard.iremonger@intel.com> Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] ethdev: support API to set max LRO packet size Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 13:11:18 +0000 Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801A8C83047@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <AM0PR0502MB40197D18E5F48633075AADBBD27B0@AM0PR0502MB4019.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> > -----Original Message----- > From: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com> > Sent: Friday, November 8, 2019 11:56 AM > To: Yigit, Ferruh <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; Dekel Peled <dekelp@mellanox.com>; Mcnamara, John <john.mcnamara@intel.com>; > Kovacevic, Marko <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>; nhorman@tuxdriver.com; ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com; > somnath.kotur@broadcom.com; Burakov, Anatoly <anatoly.burakov@intel.com>; xuanziyang2@huawei.com; > cloud.wangxiaoyun@huawei.com; zhouguoyang@huawei.com; Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>; Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>; > rmody@marvell.com; shshaikh@marvell.com; maxime.coquelin@redhat.com; Bie, Tiwei <tiwei.bie@intel.com>; Wang, Zhihong > <zhihong.wang@intel.com>; yongwang@vmware.com; Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; arybchenko@solarflare.com; Wu, > Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Iremonger, Bernard <bernard.iremonger@intel.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] ethdev: support API to set max LRO packet size > > > > From: Ferruh Yigit > > On 11/8/2019 10:10 AM, Matan Azrad wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Ferruh Yigit > > >> On 11/8/2019 6:54 AM, Matan Azrad wrote: > > >>> Hi > > >>> > > >>> From: Ferruh Yigit > > >>>> On 11/7/2019 12:35 PM, Dekel Peled wrote: > > >>>>> @@ -1266,6 +1286,18 @@ struct rte_eth_dev * > > >>>>> > > >>>> RTE_ETHER_MAX_LEN; > > >>>>> } > > >>>>> > > >>>>> + /* > > >>>>> + * If LRO is enabled, check that the maximum aggregated > > packet > > >>>>> + * size is supported by the configured device. > > >>>>> + */ > > >>>>> + if (dev_conf->rxmode.offloads & > > DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_TCP_LRO) { > > >>>>> + ret = check_lro_pkt_size( > > >>>>> + port_id, dev_conf- > > >>>>> rxmode.max_lro_pkt_size, > > >>>>> + dev_info.max_lro_pkt_size); > > >>>>> + if (ret != 0) > > >>>>> + goto rollback; > > >>>>> + } > > >>>>> + > > >>>> > > >>>> This check forces applications that enable LRO to provide > > >> 'max_lro_pkt_size' > > >>>> config value. > > >>> > > >>> Yes.(we can break an API, we noticed it) > > >> > > >> I am not talking about API/ABI breakage, that part is OK. > > >> With this check, if the application requested LRO offload but not > > >> provided 'max_lro_pkt_size' value, device configuration will fail. > > >> > > > Yes > > >> Can there be a case application is good with whatever the PMD can > > >> support as max? > > > Yes can be - you know, we can do everything we want but it is better to be > > consistent: > > > Due to the fact of Max rx pkt len field is mandatory for JUMBO offload, max > > lro pkt len should be mandatory for LRO offload. > > > > > > So your question is actually why both, non-lro packets and LRO packets max > > size are mandatory... > > > > > > > > > I think it should be important values for net applications management. > > > Also good for mbuf size managements. > > > > > >>> > > >>>> - Why it is mandatory now, how it was working before if it is > > >>>> mandatory value? > > >>> > > >>> It is the same as max_rx_pkt_len which is mandatory for jumbo frame > > >> offload. > > >>> So now, when the user configures a LRO offload he must to set max > > >>> lro pkt > > >> len. > > >>> We don't want to confuse the user here with the max rx pkt len > > >> configurations and behaviors, they should be with same logic. > > >>> > > >>> This parameter defines well the LRO behavior. > > >>> Before this, each PMD took its own interpretation to what should be > > >>> the > > >> maximum size for LRO aggregated packets. > > >>> Now, the user must say what is his intension, and the ethdev can > > >>> limit it > > >> according to the device capability. > > >>> By this way, also, the PMD can organize\optimize its data-path more. > > >>> Also, the application can create different mempools for LRO queues > > >>> to > > >> allow bigger packet receiving for LRO traffic. > > >>> > > >>>> - What happens if PMD doesn't provide 'max_lro_pkt_size', so it is '0'? > > >>> Yes, you can see the feature description Dekel added. > > >>> This patch also updates all the PMDs support an LRO for non-0 value. > > >> > > >> Of course I can see the updates Matan, my point is "What happens if > > >> PMD doesn't provide 'max_lro_pkt_size'", > > >> 1) There is no check for it right, so it is acceptable? > > > > > > There is check. > > > If the capability is 0, any non-zero configuration will fail. > > > > > >> 2) Are we making this filed mandatory to provide for PMDs, it is easy > > >> to make new fields mandatory for PMDs but is this really necessary? > > > > > > Yes, for consistence. > > > > > >>> > > >>> as same as max rx pkt len, no? > > >>> > > >>>> - What do you think setting 'max_lro_pkt_size' config value to what > > >>>> PMD provided if application doesn't provide it? > > >>> Same answers as above. > > >>> > > >> > > >> If application doesn't care the value, as it has been till now, and > > >> not provided explicit 'max_lro_pkt_size', why not ethdev level use > > >> the value provided by PMD instead of failing? > > > > > > Again, same question we can ask on max rx pkt len. > > > > > > Looks like the packet size is very important value which should be set by > > the application. > > > > > > Previous applications have no option to configure it, so they haven't > > configure it, (probably cover it somehow) I think it is our miss to supply this > > info. > > > > > > Let's do it in same way as we do max rx pkt len (as this patch main idea). > > > Later, we can change both to other meaning. > > > > > > > I think it is not a good reason to introduce a new mandatory config option for > > application because of 'max_rx_pkt_len' does it. > > It is mandatory only if LRO offload is configured. So max_rx_pkt_len will remain max size of one packet, while max_lro_len will be max accumulate size for each LRO session? BTW, I think that for ixgbe max lro is RTE_IPV4_MAX_PKT_LEN. ixgbe_vf, as I remember, doesn’t support LRO at all. > > > Will it work, if: > > - If application doesn't provide this value, use the PMD max > > May cause a problem if the mbuf size is not enough for the PMD maximum. Another question, what will happen if PMD will ignore that value and will generate packets bigger then requested? > > > - If both application and PMD doesn't provide this value, fail on configure()? > > It will work. > In my opinion - not ideal. > > Matan >
next prev parent reply index Thread overview: 79+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-11-05 8:40 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] " Dekel Peled 2019-11-05 8:40 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] ethdev: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-05 12:39 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2019-11-05 13:09 ` Thomas Monjalon 2019-11-05 14:18 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-05 14:27 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2019-11-05 14:51 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-05 8:40 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/3] net/mlx5: use " Dekel Peled 2019-11-05 8:40 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/3] app/testpmd: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-05 9:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/3] support " Matan Azrad 2019-11-06 11:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 " Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 11:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/3] ethdev: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 12:26 ` Thomas Monjalon 2019-11-06 12:39 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 11:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/3] net/mlx5: use " Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 11:34 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] app/testpmd: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 12:35 ` Iremonger, Bernard 2019-11-06 13:14 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 14:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] support " Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 14:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/3] ethdev: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-07 11:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Shahed Shaikh 2019-11-07 12:18 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 14:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/3] net/mlx5: use " Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 14:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] app/testpmd: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-06 16:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/3] support " Iremonger, Bernard 2019-11-07 6:10 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-07 12:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Dekel Peled 2019-11-07 12:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/3] ethdev: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-07 20:15 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-08 6:54 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-08 9:19 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-08 10:10 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-08 11:37 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-08 11:56 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-08 12:51 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-08 16:11 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 16:53 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-09 18:20 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-10 23:40 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-11 8:01 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-12 18:31 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-11 11:15 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-11 11:33 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-11 12:21 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-11 13:32 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-08 13:11 ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message] 2019-11-08 14:10 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 14:52 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-08 16:08 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 16:28 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-09 18:26 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-10 22:51 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-11 6:53 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-07 12:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/3] net/mlx5: use " Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 9:12 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2019-11-08 9:23 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-07 12:35 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/3] app/testpmd: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-07 14:20 ` Iremonger, Bernard 2019-11-07 20:25 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-08 6:56 ` Matan Azrad 2019-11-08 13:58 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 6:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/3] support " Matan Azrad 2019-11-08 16:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 " Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 16:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/3] ethdev: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-10 23:07 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-11 7:40 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 16:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] net/mlx5: use " Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 16:42 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] app/testpmd: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-10 23:11 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-11 7:40 ` Dekel Peled 2019-11-08 23:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6] ethdev: add " Thomas Monjalon 2019-11-10 22:47 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2019-11-11 17:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/3] support API to set " Dekel Peled 2019-11-11 17:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/3] ethdev: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-12 0:46 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-11 17:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/3] net/mlx5: use " Dekel Peled 2019-11-11 17:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/3] app/testpmd: " Dekel Peled 2019-11-12 0:46 ` Ferruh Yigit 2019-11-12 0:47 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/3] support " Ferruh Yigit
Reply instructions: You may reply publically 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=2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725801A8C83047@IRSMSX104.ger.corp.intel.com \ --to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \ --cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \ --cc=anatoly.burakov@intel.com \ --cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \ --cc=bernard.iremonger@intel.com \ --cc=cloud.wangxiaoyun@huawei.com \ --cc=dekelp@mellanox.com \ --cc=dev@dpdk.org \ --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \ --cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \ --cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \ --cc=marko.kovacevic@intel.com \ --cc=matan@mellanox.com \ --cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \ --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \ --cc=rmody@marvell.com \ --cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \ --cc=shshaikh@marvell.com \ --cc=somnath.kotur@broadcom.com \ --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \ --cc=tiwei.bie@intel.com \ --cc=viacheslavo@mellanox.com \ --cc=wenzhuo.lu@intel.com \ --cc=xuanziyang2@huawei.com \ --cc=yongwang@vmware.com \ --cc=zhihong.wang@intel.com \ --cc=zhouguoyang@huawei.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
DPDK patches and discussions Archives are clonable: git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git # If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may # initialize and index your mirror using the following commands: public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \ dev@dpdk.org public-inbox-index dev Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox