From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C645594B
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 17:01:50 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27])
 by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Jul 2015 08:01:50 -0700
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,523,1432623600"; d="scan'208";a="610787826"
Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155])
 by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 Jul 2015 08:01:48 -0700
Received: from irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.7.245]) by
 IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.85]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002;
 Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:01:47 +0100
From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: "Zhang, Helin" <helin.zhang@intel.com>, Thomas Monjalon
 <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, "Liu, Yong" <yong.liu@intel.com>, "Cao,
 Waterman" <waterman.cao@intel.com>
Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
Thread-Index: AQHQvkSSYVmvzSC3WkO2UqvxrgDn2J3nRY4AgABI2QCAABF48A==
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 15:01:46 +0000
Message-ID: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836A28E25@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <1436860647-5862-1-git-send-email-jingjing.wu@intel.com>
 <F35DEAC7BCE34641BA9FAC6BCA4A12E70A8941A9@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
 <2646739.fctqXc0xZm@xps13>
 <F35DEAC7BCE34641BA9FAC6BCA4A12E70A898517@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <F35DEAC7BCE34641BA9FAC6BCA4A12E70A898517@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 15:01:50 -0000

As I remember, the problem is that inside l3fwd each I/O lcore tries to cla=
im a TX queue on each port in use for itself
(to avoid any synchronisation overhead).
Obviously on some legacy (and virtual) devices this is not possible.
On l3fwd-vf, several lcores share the same TX queue.
(synchronisation is done on port basis right now, i.e. only one tx queue pe=
r port is always used).=20
Konstantin

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Zhang, Helin
> Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:51 PM
> To: Thomas Monjalon; Liu, Yong; Cao, Waterman
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
>=20
> Marvin/Waterman
>=20
> Could you help to check if l3fwd is good enough for all cases (1g/10/40g,=
 PF and VF, single queue/multiple queue)?
> We aim to remove l3fwd-vf to reduce an example application which is not s=
o necessary.
> Thank you!
>=20
> Regards,
> Helin
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 3:30 AM
> > To: Zhang, Helin
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wu, Jingjing
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] examples: remove l3fwd-vf example
> >
> > 2015-07-14 14:50, Zhang, Helin:
> > > From: Wu, Jingjing
> > > > Because VF multi-queues can be supported, l3fwd can run on vf.
> > > > Suggest to remove the l3fwd-vf example.
> > > Totally agree with this!
> > > But we need the confirmation from validation guys of that l3fwd works
> > > quite well on VF with all NICs (e.g. i350, 82599, x550, xl710, and fm=
10k).
> >
> > Helin, any new from validation?