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 81BFF42C01; Thu, 1 Jun 2023 10:48:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7229B406B3; Thu, 1 Jun 2023 10:48:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27595406A2 for ; Thu, 1 Jun 2023 10:48:28 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1685609307; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=anLhshMowLQmuJfoiMqbI7b2muuv3nTW0G1CGq2RQB0=; b=Cl0xkob/LAVLHAXWv/pXA1oj50WRvU7gdMnRDCjL5VuVPJJNyNQ55urbZtMNRJOBbZEczH x/LhriKSCBM2E372Q3BlcNyQ9R2y4jYiq3FeFUIIkpeUitWf3sxfBxGRzoKkvW+viNFjjl B7E3IJpvO4vTp9nFWfIRNUSTdv4mkhQ= Received: from mail-pl1-f199.google.com (mail-pl1-f199.google.com [209.85.214.199]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-447-5aJq9sf3OZq6JoQF9vMA7w-1; Thu, 01 Jun 2023 04:48:24 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 5aJq9sf3OZq6JoQF9vMA7w-1 Received: by mail-pl1-f199.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1b03057588cso6488705ad.1 for ; Thu, 01 Jun 2023 01:48:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1685609303; x=1688201303; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=anLhshMowLQmuJfoiMqbI7b2muuv3nTW0G1CGq2RQB0=; b=OpXIhOj1OFauz+5lRQoUoq6h2JxJbAVc05X0R2Rnh5jVjtl6QZesOPyHo8aJzJy7kS 5J6BVnEWcXDDvEprLZcwpOUoy6TTk+sCl+9NJSd/vmCedsJywjdr9OeayjMccEHkja7D ++IeF6PnPlsEm7gnM//tvk7iTShENpDzyVjOcocwwIxPcfD0DraEfXCueovTh2U53PSF oaBcupe6hvyhgGkzG/xDhNqKgKwXEXHHqU+p9cvPirGqaFc8lNkLmHXJTswE7hxUVj7c QvQflkwN+3B9StLGSNexiz7Oh6DHljMxmwqjskkCXKSExxBhQu7RiBQdsi6goiZ113Z3 amyw== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDzGWBas7rwbF2IPCP7lc+jIqW2Fdy0/82UjhHzAYCr/obT6vrlG YKXBSa0bgcRCvuTKbR6IHGKHXkwA8bxa639dXRn/yHeAkoT4tlRoQbR7k694v+uiG4RotJH22L3 Kz8plAbWHscsZONuJd4Y= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b215:b0:1b0:25d2:6f11 with SMTP id t21-20020a170902b21500b001b025d26f11mr6602577plr.17.1685609303598; Thu, 01 Jun 2023 01:48:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4BgaOfDGF90MIyeLfgLdSORZDOwXKp1NFowr3ym88NQzce4hEJ989xpTpyjyFLZCgt/OgLzanBy/qPcK6PTmk= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b215:b0:1b0:25d2:6f11 with SMTP id t21-20020a170902b21500b001b025d26f11mr6602559plr.17.1685609303292; Thu, 01 Jun 2023 01:48:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230505103102.2912297-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2023 10:48:12 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] ethdev: advertise flow restore in mbuf To: Ori Kam Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)" , "i.maximets@ovn.org" , Aman Singh , Yuying Zhang , Matan Azrad , Slava Ovsiienko , Andrew Rybchenko , Ferruh Yigit X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 8:44=E2=80=AFPM David Marchand wrote: > On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 6:00=E2=80=AFPM Ori Kam wrote: > > > As reported by Ilya [1], unconditionally calling > > > rte_flow_get_restore_info() impacts an application performance for dr= ivers > > > that do not provide this ops. > > > It could also impact processing of packets that require no call to > > > rte_flow_get_restore_info() at all. > > > > > > Advertise in mbuf (via a dynamic flag) whether the driver has more > > > metadata to provide via rte_flow_get_restore_info(). > > > The application can then call it only when required. > > > > > > Link: http://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/5248c2ca-f2a6-3fb0-38b8- > > > 7f659bfa40de@ovn.org/ > > > Signed-off-by: David Marchand > > > --- > > > Note: I did not test this RFC patch yet but I hope we can resume and > > > maybe conclude on the discussion for the tunnel offloading API. > > > > > > > I think your approach has a good base but what happens if > > it is not relevant for all flows? In this case your solution will not w= ork. > > Sorry, I am not following. > Could you develop? I still don't get your comment, could you give an example/usecase where this approach can't work? Thanks. --=20 David Marchand