From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2436F28EE for ; Mon, 22 May 2017 14:54:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 May 2017 05:54:29 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.38,377,1491289200"; d="scan'208";a="105422951" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.237.220.81]) ([10.237.220.81]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 22 May 2017 05:54:28 -0700 To: Andrew Rybchenko , dev@dpdk.org, Sergio Gonzalez Monroy References: <1495023908-10977-1-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com> <1495116004-11761-1-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com> <1495116004-11761-3-git-send-email-arybchenko@solarflare.com> <45b5b0a6-a5be-88d7-734f-c2b1dd1b31be@intel.com> <4e8bdd9d-e26d-0cb6-9e0f-68df9f42c5d3@intel.com> <63f69c97-74a5-1044-2409-4181f34fb2b1@solarflare.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: <3c927425-a276-01ef-540e-273ab06958f6@intel.com> Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 13:54:28 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <63f69c97-74a5-1044-2409-4181f34fb2b1@solarflare.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/3] net/sfc: support multi-process 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 May 2017 12:54:31 -0000 On 5/22/2017 1:44 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: > On 05/22/2017 03:36 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >> On 5/22/2017 1:07 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: >>> On 05/22/2017 02:29 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote: >>>> On 5/18/2017 3:00 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote: >>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Rybchenko >>>>> Reviewed-by: Andy Moreton >>>> <...> >>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef10_rx.c b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef10_rx.c >>>>> index 1484bab..60812cb 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef10_rx.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/sfc/sfc_ef10_rx.c >>>>> @@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ struct sfc_dp_rx sfc_ef10_rx = { >>>>> .type = SFC_DP_RX, >>>>> .hw_fw_caps = SFC_DP_HW_FW_CAP_EF10, >>>>> }, >>>>> - .features = 0, >>>>> + .features = SFC_DP_RX_FEAT_MULTI_PROCESS, >>>> Why this flag is needed, I mean why multi process support is not always >>>> enabled by default? >>> libefx-based datapath intensively uses function pointers (primary >>> process function pointers stored in data structures). So, it does not >>> work in multi process. >> But this currently added always, if I don't miss anything. And only >> checked once in secondary path and error returned if not set. >> >> Is there any code path that behaves different based on this flag? Or any >> case that this flags shouldn't be set? > > sfc_efx_rx (and sfc_efx_tx) does not have the flag. Got it, thanks. > >> What happens if this flag removed, and assumed it is always set? (this >> and tx version of this flag) > > Init in the secondary process fails if datapath chosen by the primary > process does not have the flag. > >>>> <...> > >