From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com> Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F7CE58DB for <dev@dpdk.org>; Thu, 1 Dec 2016 23:31:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Dec 2016 14:31:44 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,284,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="38046180" Received: from irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.25]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 01 Dec 2016 14:31:43 -0800 Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.79]) by irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.25]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Thu, 1 Dec 2016 22:31:42 +0000 From: "Kulasek, TomaszX" <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> CC: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, "olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com> Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation Thread-Index: AQHSRbBkXBK52xh5bEGv2Yak9bo9p6DuQDCAgAUTIYCAACxPUIAADdsAgAAl19A= Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 22:31:42 +0000 Message-ID: <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A14F57CDE@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <1477486575-25148-1-git-send-email-tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com> <1734448.0id6dCbsBT@xps13> <3042915272161B4EB253DA4D77EB373A14F57CAE@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <2505996.o0gdCe9Hsd@xps13> In-Reply-To: <2505996.o0gdCe9Hsd@xps13> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <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: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 22:31:46 -0000 Hi Thomas, > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 1, 2016 20:52 > To: Kulasek, TomaszX <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; > olivier.matz@6wind.com; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 1/6] ethdev: add Tx preparation >=20 > 2016-12-01 19:20, Kulasek, TomaszX: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > Sorry, I have answered for this question in another thread and I missed > about this one. Detailed answer is below. >=20 > Yes you already gave this answer. > And I will continue asking the question until you understand it. >=20 > > > 2016-11-28 11:54, Thomas Monjalon: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > 2016-11-23 18:36, Tomasz Kulasek: > > > > > --- a/config/common_base > > > > > +++ b/config/common_base > > > > > @@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ CONFIG_RTE_MAX_QUEUES_PER_PORT=3D1024 > > > > > CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IEEE1588=3Dn > > > > > CONFIG_RTE_ETHDEV_QUEUE_STAT_CNTRS=3D16 > > > > > CONFIG_RTE_ETHDEV_RXTX_CALLBACKS=3Dy > > > > > +CONFIG_RTE_ETHDEV_TX_PREPARE=3Dy > > > > > > > > Please, remind me why is there a configuration here. > > > > It should be the responsibility of the application to call > > > > tx_prepare or not. If the application choose to use this new API > > > > but it is disabled, then the packets won't be prepared and there is > no error code: > > > > > > > > > +#else > > > > > + > > > > > +static inline uint16_t > > > > > +rte_eth_tx_prepare(__rte_unused uint8_t port_id, __rte_unused > > > uint16_t queue_id, > > > > > + __rte_unused struct rte_mbuf **tx_pkts, uint16_t > > > > > +nb_pkts) { > > > > > + return nb_pkts; > > > > > +} > > > > > + > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > So the application is not aware of the issue and it will not use > > > > any fallback. > > > > tx_prepare mechanism can be turned off by compilation flag (as discusse= d > with Jerin in http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/15770/) to provide real > NOOP functionality (e.g. for low-end CPUs, where even unnecessary memory > dereference and check can have significant impact on performance). > > > > Jerin observed that on some architectures (e.g. low-end ARM with > embedded NIC), just reading and comparing 'dev->tx_pkt_prepare' may cause > significant performance drop, so he proposed to introduce this > configuration flag to provide real NOOP when tx_prepare functionality is > not required, and can be turned on based on the _target_ configuration. > > > > For other cases, when this flag is turned on (by default), and > tx_prepare is not implemented, functional NOOP is used based on compariso= n > (dev->tx_pkt_prepare =3D=3D NULL). >=20 > So if the application call this function and if it is disabled, it simply > won't work. Packets won't be prepared, checksum won't be computed. >=20 > I give up, I just NACK. It is not to be turned on/off whatever someone wants, but only and only for= the case, when platform developer knows, that his platform doesn't need th= is callback, so, he may turn off it and then save some performance (this op= tion is per target). For this case, the behavior of tx_prepare will be exactly the same when it = is turned on or off. If is not the same, there's no sense to turn it off. T= here were long topic, where we've tried to convince you, that it should be = turned on for all devices. Tomasz