From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C4B7433EB; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 02:21:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7E9D402BF; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 02:21:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from szxga01-in.huawei.com (szxga01-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.187]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 701474029E for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 02:21:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from kwepemm000004.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.56]) by szxga01-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4SfPmM4tCZzvR7Y; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 09:21:07 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.121.59] (10.67.121.59) by kwepemm000004.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.18) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35; Tue, 28 Nov 2023 09:21:37 +0800 Message-ID: <93239148-8a4d-7b3a-9e39-6659566c64dc@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 09:21:36 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] doc: add RSS hash algorithm feature To: Ferruh Yigit , CC: , , Chengwen Feng , Dongdong Liu , Jie Hai References: <20231123135916.33315-1-lihuisong@huawei.com> <20231125014745.61348-1-lihuisong@huawei.com> <20231125014745.61348-2-lihuisong@huawei.com> <89b73632-8a7a-e54c-2957-04c347027c2e@huawei.com> <8968ac41-bf19-40ac-a057-aad7b46b7ca8@amd.com> From: "lihuisong (C)" In-Reply-To: <8968ac41-bf19-40ac-a057-aad7b46b7ca8@amd.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.67.121.59] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems705-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.182) To kwepemm000004.china.huawei.com (7.193.23.18) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 在 2023/11/27 23:43, Ferruh Yigit 写道: > On 11/27/2023 1:12 PM, lihuisong (C) wrote: >> 在 2023/11/27 20:19, Ferruh Yigit 写道: >>> On 11/25/2023 1:47 AM, Huisong Li wrote: >>>> Add hash algorithm feature introduced by 23.11 and fix some RSS features >>>> description. >>>> >>>> Fixes: 34ff088cc241 ("ethdev: set and query RSS hash algorithm") >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Huisong Li >>>> Acked-by: Chengwen Feng >>>> --- >>>>   doc/guides/nics/features.rst | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++---- >>>>   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst >>>> index 1a1dc16c1e..0d38c5c525 100644 >>>> --- a/doc/guides/nics/features.rst >>>> +++ b/doc/guides/nics/features.rst >>>> @@ -277,10 +277,12 @@ RSS hash >>>>   Supports RSS hashing on RX. >>>>     * **[uses]     user config**: ``dev_conf.rxmode.mq_mode`` = >>>> ``RTE_ETH_MQ_RX_RSS_FLAG``. >>>> -* **[uses]     user config**: ``dev_conf.rx_adv_conf.rss_conf``. >>>> +* **[uses]     user config**: ``rss_conf.rss_hf``. >>>> >>> Feature title is "RSS hash", it can be two things, >>> 1. "Receive Side Scaling" support >>> 2. Provide RSS hash to application >>> >>> When this document first prepared RSS hash value was always provided to >>> the application when RSS enabled. >>> So intention with this feature was "Receive Side Scaling" support, hence >>> 'RTE_ETH_MQ_RX_RSS_FLAG' added. >>> >>> Later providing RSS has to the application separated as optimization, >>> 'RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH' & 'RTE_MBUF_F_RX_RSS_HASH' added for this >>> support. >> What should I do for above two comments？ >> To tell application how to use it? >> > Just tried to give some context. got it. > > > >>> As the intention of this feature is "Receive Side Scaling" support, we >>> shouldn't reduce configuration struct to 'rss_conf.rss_hf'. >>> >>> Instead perhaps can expand to: >>> 'rte_eth_conf.rx_adv_conf.rss_conf', 'rte_eth_rss_conf' >>  I just pick their common part.😁 >> >> ok, will fix it. >> >>> >>>>   * **[uses]     rte_eth_rxconf,rte_eth_rxmode**: >>>> ``offloads:RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH``. >>>>   * **[provides] rte_eth_dev_info**: ``flow_type_rss_offloads``. >>>>   * **[provides] mbuf**: ``mbuf.ol_flags:RTE_MBUF_F_RX_RSS_HASH``, >>>> ``mbuf.rss``. >>>> +* **[related]  API**: ``rte_eth_dev_configure``, >>>> ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update`` >>>> +  ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_conf_get()``. >>>> >>> ack >>> >>>>     .. _nic_features_inner_rss: >>>> @@ -288,7 +290,7 @@ Supports RSS hashing on RX. >>>>   Inner RSS >>>>   --------- >>>>   -Supports RX RSS hashing on Inner headers. >>>> +Supports RX RSS hashing on Inner headers by rte_flow API. >>>> >>> This should be clarified with details below, not sure if it required to >>> limit description to rte_flow. >> But this block like rte_flow_action_rss is from rte_flow. >> And ethdev ops doesn't support inner RSS. >> So I think it is ok. >> > Yes it is supported by rte_flow, and '[uses]' information should already > clarify it. Should we remove the 'rte_flow API' wrods I added in above description? > >>> >>> And I guess similar confusion exist with the providing hash to user. >>> Need to check if rte_flow implementation puts hash to mbuf along with >>> doing the RSS, or if it checks 'RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH' offload, >>> and update below items accordingly. >> Do we need to tell user how to use it here? >> I feel this document is a little simple and main to list interface for >> user. >> In addition, it is better that the more detail about RSS should be >> presented  in rte_flow features. >> > No, I am not suggesting to add more detail. > > My concern is 'RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH' information may not be > correct, ethdev APIs checks offload flags, but does rte_flow > implementation check it? As far as I know, It is possibly verified in PMD if have or required. > > My suggestion is double check that piece of information and fix it if > required. > > >>> >>>>   * **[uses]    rte_flow_action_rss**: ``level``. >>>>   * **[uses]    rte_eth_rxconf,rte_eth_rxmode**: >>>> ``offloads:RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_RSS_HASH``. >>>> @@ -303,9 +305,25 @@ RSS key update >>>>   Supports configuration of Receive Side Scaling (RSS) hash >>>> computation. Updating >>>>   Receive Side Scaling (RSS) hash key. >>>>   -* **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``rss_hash_update``, >>>> ``rss_hash_conf_get``. >>>> +* **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``dev_configure``, >>>> ``rss_hash_update``, ``rss_hash_conf_get``. >>>> +* **[uses]     user config**: ``rss_conf.rss_key``, >>>> ``rss_conf.rss_key_len`` >>>>   * **[provides]   rte_eth_dev_info**: ``hash_key_size``. >>>> -* **[related]    API**: ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update()``, >>>> +* **[related]    API**: ``rte_eth_dev_configure``, >>>> ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update()``, >>>> +  ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_conf_get()``. >>>> + >>> ack >>> >>> There is an inconsistency in the documentation but I think it is good to >>> use '()' when documenting API, like: 'rte_eth_dev_configure()' >> +1 will fix it. >>> >>>> + >>>> +.. _nic_features_rss_hash_algo_update: >>>> + >>>> +RSS hash algorithm update >>>> +------------------------- >>>> + >>>> +Supports configuration of Receive Side Scaling (RSS) hash algorithm. >>>> Updating >>>> +RSS hash algorithm. >>>> + >>>> +* **[implements] eth_dev_ops**: ``dev_configure``, >>>> ``rss_hash_update``, ``rss_hash_conf_get``. >>>> +* **[uses]     user config**: ``rss_conf.algorithm`` >>>> +* **[provides]   rte_eth_dev_info**: ``rss_algo_capa``. >>>> +* **[related]    API**: ``rte_eth_dev_configure``, >>>> ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_update()``, >>>>     ``rte_eth_dev_rss_hash_conf_get()``. >>>> >>> This document describes features listed in the 'default.ini', so we >>> shouldn't have above. >>> >>> And I don't think RSS hash algorithm update is a big enough feature to >>> list in the feature list, perhaps it can be embedded in the RSS support >>> block, what do you think? >> Yes it is not a bit feature. >> so put it to RSS hash, right? >> > Yes please. > > .