DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: fengchengwen <fengchengwen@huawei.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, <nipun.gupta@nxp.com>,
	<hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
	"Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Subject: [dpdk-dev] RFC: Kunpeng DMA driver API design decision
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2021 15:01:28 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <27a77ca8-9406-1737-ff84-774b2ca561f7@huawei.com> (raw)

Hi all,

We prepare support Kunpeng DMA engine under rawdev framework, and observed that
there are two different implementations of the data plane API:
1. rte_rawdev_enqueue/dequeue_buffers which was implemented by dpaa2_qdma and
   octeontx2_dma driver.
2. rte_ioat_enqueue_xxx/rte_ioat_completed_ops which was implemented by ioat
   driver.

Due to following consideration (mainly performance), we plan to implement API
like ioat (not the same, have some differences) in data plane:
1. The rte_rawdev_enqueue_buffers use opaque buffer reference which is vendor's
   specific, so it needs first to translate application parameters to opaque
   pointer, and then driver writes the opaque data onto hardware, this may lead
   to performance problem.
2. rte_rawdev_xxx doesn't provide memory barrier API which may need to extend
   by opaque data (e.g. add flag to every request), this may introduce some
   complexity.

Also the example/ioat was used to compare DMA and CPU-memcopy performance,
Could we generalized it so that it supports multiple-vendor ?

I don't know if the community accepts this kind of implementation, so if you
have any comments, please provide feedback.

Best Regards.


             reply	other threads:[~2021-06-12  7:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-12  7:01 fengchengwen [this message]
2021-06-12  8:31 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-06-12  8:41   ` Jerin Jacob
2021-06-12 11:53     ` Fengchengwen
2021-06-14 18:18     ` Bruce Richardson

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=27a77ca8-9406-1737-ff84-774b2ca561f7@huawei.com \
    --to=fengchengwen@huawei.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=nipun.gupta@nxp.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    /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).