From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>, Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomasm@mellanox.com>, "stephen@networkplumber.org" <stephen@networkplumber.org>, Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@nvidia.com>, "olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, "jerinjacobk@gmail.com" <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>, "maxime.coquelin@redhat.com" <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>, "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>, Asaf Penso <asafp@nvidia.com>, Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 22:59:21 +0100 Message-ID: <90d1f9d6-9183-838b-2cf8-d276aa4f42b1@intel.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <MWHPR12MB13602B0C1E0EF3C134130064DF070@MWHPR12MB1360.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> On 10/12/2020 10:56 AM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote: > Hi, Andrew > > Thank you for the comments. > > We have two approaches how to specify multiple segments to split Rx packets: > 1. update queue configuration structure > 2. introduce new rx_queue_setup_ex() routine with extra parameters. > > For [1] my only actual dislike is that we would have multiple places to specify > the pool - in rx_queue_setup() and in the config structure. So, we should > implement some checking (if we have offload flag set we should check > whether mp parameter is NULL and segment descriptions array pointer/size > is provided, if no offload flag set - we must check the description array is empty). > >> @Thomas, @Ferruh: I'd like to hear what other ethdev maintainers think >> about it. > > Yes, it would be very nice to hear extra opinions. Do we think the providing > of extra API function is worse than extending existing structure, introducing > some conditional ambiguity and complicating the parameter compliance > check? > I think decision was given with the deprecation notice which already says ``rte_eth_rxconf`` will be updated for this. With new API, we need to create a new dev_ops too, not sure about creating a new dev_ops for a single PMD. For the PMD that supports this feature will need two dev_ops that is fairly close to each other, as Andrew mentioned this is a duplication. And from user perspective two setup functions with overlaps can be confusing. +1 to having single setup function but update the config, and I can see v5 sent this way, I will check it. > Now I'm updating the existing version on the patch based on rx_queue_ex() > and then could prepare the version for configuration structure, > it is not a problem - approaches are very similar, we just should choose > the most relevant one. > > With best regards, Slava > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrew Rybchenko <Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru> >> Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 11:45 >> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org >> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomasm@mellanox.com>; >> stephen@networkplumber.org; ferruh.yigit@intel.com; Shahaf Shuler >> <shahafs@nvidia.com>; olivier.matz@6wind.com; jerinjacobk@gmail.com; >> maxime.coquelin@redhat.com; david.marchand@redhat.com; Asaf Penso >> <asafp@nvidia.com> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split >> >> Hi Slava, >> >> I'm sorry for late reply. See my notes below. >> >> On 10/1/20 11:54 AM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote: >>> Hi, Andrew >>> >>> Thank you for the comments, please see my replies below. >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com> >>>> Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2020 19:55 >>>> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>; dev@dpdk.org >>>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomasm@mellanox.com>; >>>> stephen@networkplumber.org; ferruh.yigit@intel.com; Shahaf Shuler >>>> <shahafs@nvidia.com>; olivier.matz@6wind.com; >> jerinjacobk@gmail.com; >>>> maxime.coquelin@redhat.com; david.marchand@redhat.com; Asaf >> Penso >>>> <asafp@nvidia.com> >>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split >>>> >>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>> For example, let's suppose we configured the Rx queue with the >>>>> following segments: >>>>> seg0 - pool0, len0=14B, off0=RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM >>>>> seg1 - pool1, len1=20B, off1=0B >>>>> seg2 - pool2, len2=20B, off2=0B >>>>> seg3 - pool3, len3=512B, off3=0B >>>>> >>>>> The packet 46 bytes long will look like the following: >>>>> seg0 - 14B long @ RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM in mbuf from pool0 >>>>> seg1 - 20B long @ 0 in mbuf from pool1 >>>>> seg2 - 12B long @ 0 in mbuf from pool2 >>>>> >>>>> The packet 1500 bytes long will look like the following: >>>>> seg0 - 14B @ RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM in mbuf from pool0 >>>>> seg1 - 20B @ 0 in mbuf from pool1 >>>>> seg2 - 20B @ 0 in mbuf from pool2 >>>>> seg3 - 512B @ 0 in mbuf from pool3 >>>>> seg4 - 512B @ 0 in mbuf from pool3 >>>>> seg5 - 422B @ 0 in mbuf from pool3 >>>> >>>> The behaviour is logical, but what to do if HW can't do it, i.e. use >>>> the last segment many times. Should it reject configuration if >>>> provided segments are insufficient to fit MTU packet? How to report >>>> the limitation? >>>> (I'm still trying to convince that SCATTER and BUFFER_SPLIT should be >>>> independent). >>> >>> BUFFER_SPLIT is rather the way to tune SCATTER. Currently scattering >>> happens on unconditional mbuf data buffer boundaries (we have reserved >>> HEAD space in the first mbuf and fill this one to the buffer end, the >>> next mbuf buffers might be filled completely). BUFFER_SPLIT provides >>> the way to specify the desired points to split packet, not just >>> blindly follow buffer boundaries. There is the check inplemented in >>> common part if each split segment fits the mbuf allocated from >> appropriate pool. >>> PMD should do extra check internally whether it supports the requested >>> split settings, if not - call will be rejected. >>> >> >> @Thomas, @Ferruh: I'd like to hear what other ethdev maintainers think >> about it. >> >>> [snip] >>>> >>>> I dislike the idea to introduce new device operation. >>>> rte_eth_rxconf has reserved space and BUFFER_SPLIT offload will mean >>>> that PMD looks at the split configuration location there. >>>> >>> We considered the approach of pushing split setting to the rxconf >>> structure. >>> >> [https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpatc >>> >> hes.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F75205%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cviacheslavo% >> 40nvidi >>> >> a.com%7C97a49cb62028432610ea08d86e8b3283%7C43083d15727340c1b7 >> db39efd9c >>> >> cc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637380891414182285&sdata=liII5DHGlJAL8wEwV >> Vika79tp >>> 8R9faTZ0lXrlfvQGZE%3D&reserved=0] >>> But it seems there are some issues: >>> >>> - the split configuration description requires the variable length >>> array (due to variations in number of segments), so rte_eth_rxconf >>> structure would have the variable length (not nice, IMO). >>> >>> We could push pointers to the array of rte_eth_rxseg, but we would >>> lost the single structure (and contiguous memory) simplicity, this >>> approach has no advantages over the specifying the split configuration >>> as parameters of setup_ex(). >>> >> >> I think it has a huge advantage to avoid extra device operation. >> >>> - it would introduces the ambiguity, rte_eth_rx_queue_setup() >>> specifies the single mbuf pool as parameter. What should we do with >>> it? Set to NULL? Treat as the first pool? I would prefer to specify >>> all split segments in uniform fashion, i.e. as array or rte_eth_rxseg >>> structures (and it can be easily updated with some extra segment >>> attributes if needed). So, in my opinion, we should remove/replace the >>> pool parameter in rx_queue_setup (by introducing new func). >>> >> >> I'm trying to resolve the ambiguity as described above (see BUFFER_SPLIT vs >> SCATTER). Use the pointer for tail segments with respect to SCATTER >> capability. >> >>> - specifying the new extended setup roiutine has an advantage that we >>> should not update any PMDs code in part of existing implementations of >>> rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(). >> >> It is not required since it is controlled by the new offload flags. If the offload >> is not supported, the new field is invisible for PMD (it simply ignores). >> >>> >>> If PMD supports BUFFER_SPLIT (or other related feature) it just should >>> provide >>> rte_eth_rx_queue_setup_ex() and check the >> DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT >>> (or HEADER_SPLIT, or ever feature) it supports. The common code does >>> not check the feature flags - it is on PMDs' own. In order to >>> configure PMD to perfrom arbitrary desired Rx spliting the application >>> should check DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT in port capabilites, if found >>> - set DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT in configuration and call >>> rte_eth_rx_queue_setup_ex(). >>> And this approach can be followed for any other split related feature. >>> >>> With best regards, Slava >>> >> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-13 21:59 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 172+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-08-17 17:49 Slava Ovsiienko 2020-09-17 16:55 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-01 8:54 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 8:45 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-12 9:56 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 15:14 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-12 15:28 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2020-10-12 15:34 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 15:56 ` Ananyev, Konstantin 2020-10-12 15:59 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:52 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-12 16:03 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-12 16:10 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 21:59 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message] 2020-10-14 7:17 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-14 7:37 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-05 6:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/5] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-05 6:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/5] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-05 6:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/5] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-05 6:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/5] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-05 6:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/5] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-05 6:26 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/5] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/9] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/9] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-11 22:17 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-12 9:40 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 10:09 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/9] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/9] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/9] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/9] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/9] net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 7/9] net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 8/9] net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-07 15:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 9/9] net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/9] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/9] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:38 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-12 17:03 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-12 17:11 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-12 20:22 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 17:11 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/9] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/9] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/9] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 5/9] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 6/9] net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 7/9] net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 8/9] net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 16:19 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 9/9] net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/9] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/9] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/9] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/9] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/9] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 5/9] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:09 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 6/9] net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 7/9] net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 8/9] net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-12 20:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 9/9] net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 19:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 19:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 22:34 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-14 13:31 ` Olivier Matz 2020-10-14 14:42 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 19:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 19:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 19:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 19:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-13 19:21 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 18:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 18:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 18:57 ` Jerin Jacob 2020-10-15 7:43 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 9:27 ` Jerin Jacob 2020-10-15 10:27 ` Jerin Jacob 2020-10-15 10:51 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 11:26 ` Jerin Jacob 2020-10-15 11:36 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-15 11:49 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 12:49 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-15 13:07 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-15 13:57 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 20:22 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 9:49 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-15 10:34 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 11:09 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-15 14:39 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 22:13 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-14 22:50 ` Ajit Khaparde 2020-10-15 10:11 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-15 10:19 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-14 18:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 18:11 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 18:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 18:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-14 18:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 0:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] eal/rte_malloc: add alloc_size() attribute to allocation functions Stephen Hemminger 2020-10-19 14:13 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-19 14:22 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-15 20:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 20:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 20:30 ` Jerin Jacob 2020-10-15 20:33 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-15 22:01 ` Ajit Khaparde 2020-10-15 20:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 20:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 20:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 20:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-15 20:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v7 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 7:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 7:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 8:51 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-16 8:58 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-16 9:15 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 9:27 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-16 9:34 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 9:37 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-16 9:38 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 9:19 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 9:21 ` Andrew Rybchenko 2020-10-16 9:22 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 7:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 7:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 7:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 7:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 7:48 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v8 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 10:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 10:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 11:21 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 13:08 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 10:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 10:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 10:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 10:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 10:22 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v9 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 12:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 12:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 12:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 12:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 12:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 12:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 12:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 13:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 13:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 15:14 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-16 16:18 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 15:47 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 16:05 ` Thomas Monjalon 2020-10-16 16:06 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 13:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 15:05 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 15:38 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 15:48 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 15:52 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 15:55 ` Slava Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 15:57 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 13:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 13:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 13:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 13:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v11 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 1/6] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 19:22 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 21:36 ` Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 2/6] app/testpmd: add multiple pools per core creation Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 3/6] app/testpmd: add buffer split offload configuration Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 4/6] app/testpmd: add rxpkts commands and parameters Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 5/6] app/testpmd: add rxoffs " Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 6/6] app/testpmd: add extended Rx queue setup Viacheslav Ovsiienko 2020-10-16 17:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v12 0/6] ethdev: introduce Rx buffer split Ferruh Yigit 2020-10-16 17:07 ` Slava Ovsiienko
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=90d1f9d6-9183-838b-2cf8-d276aa4f42b1@intel.com \ --to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \ --cc=Andrew.Rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \ --cc=asafp@nvidia.com \ --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \ --cc=dev@dpdk.org \ --cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \ --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \ --cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \ --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \ --cc=shahafs@nvidia.com \ --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \ --cc=thomasm@mellanox.com \ --cc=viacheslavo@nvidia.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 This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone: 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 Example config snippet for mirrors. Newsgroup available over NNTP: nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git