From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 411A0A0526; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 15:06:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B52A1DDBE; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 15:06:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46F5E1DD4A for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 15:06:44 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1594213603; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=fIm8vQOQqH/wX48CKpEOsXjFGTLoFiPJ7TUbNGHyrZU=; b=jRVceJvOylA42PjhtSzVc6+2dflmWrGSKgd24IldMiOjB/H2agrgz0qRtLGKcqfswrJPdL Kk4osgucQ3ng+k++Ay8GJQfp5YyqTKL3A18Ko5WMgMxxrsJIt/N/ALXD0KKBEk00WnSIDJ fy1vhMV88T7/KF6lXZq+NneIUsL7ksw= Received: from mail-vs1-f72.google.com (mail-vs1-f72.google.com [209.85.217.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-3-fre8bvfsNp2a_E6mIKLAiw-1; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 09:06:42 -0400 X-MC-Unique: fre8bvfsNp2a_E6mIKLAiw-1 Received: by mail-vs1-f72.google.com with SMTP id x5so1240235vsf.15 for ; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 06:06:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fIm8vQOQqH/wX48CKpEOsXjFGTLoFiPJ7TUbNGHyrZU=; b=MqA4nNHmEsoA0wrbnNdNl428YsfmgSc5165m2VZtUSFoaedVfg3sZyGBexLMmYN7Rb /0CtbZwZmCeThGDdadAtG8TqHC3X8iizjpPYga3fLqNF4ZnbRJT+k9wPO60kqjG2OaYG 6PztZqoPuh8h6si5lmYeuA5QRlj4PanogW0TqHFdZYir8O0wPLwBS59qsM09/w5P5NVt rNIARngpYNvSezv91vZiD/CpYck9Pzis2xpJ2Q6IlMefDlJCelfW+IytUHLZVmVhtIcF q0vC1P9WzviZ0T9p0kDnktlJL9zmwnzMqJhTyx5UpJLpSUTpVAOPfjdaYiS+C3CEsHK9 5zEw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531qjT4PScOFeJENL/J1NKqh7iNfoXk0lu7D400FPZQBhQ6LUqJB OqHQYL5Nym5zeYi2i/b1xVpWrGufN2QPRBGk9pUClFJaheNEAN1d+ThQ3yM1wof6j/r3WRmNOqm CEG8It5cBnokL2C6U1Ig= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:249:: with SMTP id a9mr13752169vsq.198.1594213600710; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 06:06:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyGEgwK6fUrJ1O36twEzkO2D57JIc5piseLMQhWdQ5CPsZetJnBrEwnlbg8qD5A3YTUS7vso78nnYxkHDJmw2k= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:249:: with SMTP id a9mr13752143vsq.198.1594213600454; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 06:06:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200610144506.30505-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> <20200706205234.8040-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20200706205234.8040-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 15:06:29 +0200 Message-ID: To: dev Cc: Jerin Jacob , Bruce Richardson , Ray Kinsella , Thomas Monjalon , Andrew Rybchenko , Kevin Traynor , Ian Stokes , Ilya Maximets , Olivier Matz , "Ananyev, Konstantin" Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=dmarchan@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 00/10] Register non-EAL threads as lcore 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Mon, Jul 6, 2020 at 10:53 PM David Marchand wrote: > > OVS and some other applications have been hacking into DPDK internals to > fake EAL threads and avoid performance penalty of only having non-EAL > threads. > > This series proposes to add a new type of lcores and maps those threads > to such lcores. > non-EAL threads won't run the DPDK eal mainloop. > As a consequence, part of the EAL threads API cannot work. > > Having new lcores appearing during the process lifetime is not expected > by some DPDK components. This is addressed by introducing init/uninit > callacks invoked when hotplugging of such lcore. > > There is still some work/discussion: > - refuse new lcore role in incompatible EAL threads API (or document it > only as those API were already incompatible?), > - think about deprecation notices for existing RTE_FOREACH_LCORE macros > and consorts, it is probably worth discussing on how to iterate over > lcores, > > For the interested parties, I have a patch [1] against dpdk-latest OVS > branch that makes use of this series (this patch probably won't work with > v5, it will be rebased once dpdk side is ready). > > 1: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/20200626123017.28555-1-david.marchand@redhat.com/ Series applied with last comments from Konstantin. -- David Marchand