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 A90DCA04DD; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 10:34:16 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F471BF78; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 10:34:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-il1-f194.google.com (mail-il1-f194.google.com [209.85.166.194]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D0DF1BEA9 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 10:34:14 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-il1-f194.google.com with SMTP id v15so33681059iln.0 for ; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 01:34:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=z8/YYTLF7RMYVOdblsWsw7UYMQHOW9XSCUUpa28f+l4=; b=d9KxT3uE0gPnqo4jW9OS7lI6lXRxJg4XeHOeAluUxe55ssu825AQwkT8p8bFCD7p/A rgmJI0bxoSoRFmB3QGZLqHqZ+a2fFMabiDyid68bQsyr0JtpHI2bjJWcX8pJnJHVlhAL VrMt00MiKfiYawQWbZ/XBHz4alu7NA0rUTWT3GWoGGN6d3U+CGRsEsxMK/U1AzSE81o9 tIVCqH6SxXSWeXTgrXDqmCRNM56w1uYsKSsxsl1e5X7OIcs0t3Ne12GwXRqjDhoZAWeI 8LlO/iuIQepygUC9mOgB1s8rFJ9sdoHY5Vi3NQdN48fGSdCRNhFrGrccP7mMvnr7nJbF 866w== 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=z8/YYTLF7RMYVOdblsWsw7UYMQHOW9XSCUUpa28f+l4=; b=fLDxJCss5h+kluCeNe3gHDBMjOA33j9+M/ae/kUpxmBkdZMWmq6VCAeKI4iayrbn1y kbjZIZB8d4CE3RgzAykX2ERWMpxdR3SXUUKM6P8q+XhZFflY/WzfJjaC2b0uR2gHH3Up p+Y23+BAG/7G0U3B/twgaQBh3JXA/LvP53y+wzQofK5cWjHal4pqiD4l0mY7bQ00oob4 tav7f9zVwUs3QOuKBFbV10rdhgU918Mysj0YEUQasWuc5FTuZMZlTjJf3oSLj61s0SrD GFp2w5ZUT5pXNVK4nSIHdh3El/EQDsxJzRhhgT9QPlkIl1HW0mKjOj8BpMUucdTf9I3C h1OA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXnyjz7Uk//FYtFAGb5kgaMFLa3IsOkD8D7NA/b2glFmaqRC+86 EKPvNseRGPddie0qFHd65qnTrHuRpm4nJfut+OE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqydfkSdZJW6qIjgJ9cFEa3CANbW9ZG8vZIz2p6mtC1BybRqYDtjsh+jdJRmkKtF63w4E+QZrQA47MubI+DMXhE= X-Received: by 2002:a92:5e46:: with SMTP id s67mr70701940ilb.162.1577957653696; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 01:34:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191204144345.5736-1-pbhagavatula@marvell.com> <20191204144345.5736-5-pbhagavatula@marvell.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jerin Jacob Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2020 15:03:57 +0530 Message-ID: To: Nipun Gupta Cc: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula , Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , Marko Kovacevic , Ori Kam , Bruce Richardson , Radu Nicolau , Akhil Goyal , Tomasz Kantecki , Sunil Kumar Kori , Hemant Agrawal , "dev@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 04/11] examples/l3fwd: add ethdev setup based on eventdev 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 Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 2:20 PM Nipun Gupta wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula > > Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 11:52 AM > > To: Nipun Gupta ; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran > > ; Marko Kovacevic ; Ori > > Kam ; Bruce Richardson > > ; Radu Nicolau ; > > Akhil Goyal ; Tomasz Kantecki > > ; Sunil Kumar Kori ; > > Hemant Agrawal > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 04/11] examples/l3fwd: add ethdev setup > > based on eventdev > > > > >> >&local_port_conf); > > >> >> + if (ret < 0) > > >> >> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, > > >> >> + "Cannot configure device: err=%d, > > >> >> port=%d\n", > > >> >> + ret, port_id); > > >> >> + > > >> > > > >> >We should be using number of RX queues as per the config option > > >> >provided in the arguments. > > >> >L3fwd is supposed to support multiple queue. Right? > > >> > > >> The entire premise of using event device is to showcase packet > > >scheduling to > > >> cores > > >> without the need for splitting packets across multiple queues. > > >> > > >> Queue config is ignored when event mode is selected. > > > > > >For atomic queues, we have single queue providing packets to a single > > >core at a time till processing on that core is completed, irrespective of > > >the flows on that hardware queue. > > >And multiple queues are required to distribute separate packets on > > >separate cores, with these atomic queues maintaining the ordering and > > >not scheduling on other core, until processing core has completed its > > >job. > > >To have this solution generic, we should also take config parameter - > > >(port, number of queues) to enable multiple ethernet RX queues. > > > > > > > Not sure I follow we connect Rx queue to an event queue which is then > > linked to multiple event ports which are polled on > > by respective cores. > > This is what we too support, but with atomic queue case the scenario gets little complex. > Each atomic queue can be scheduled only to one event port at a time, until all the events from > that event port are processed. Then only it can move to other event port. This would make it a poll mode. We might as well use normal PMD + RSS for the same instead. i.e use l3fwd in poll mode. It will be the same in terms of performance. Right? > > To have separate event ports process packets at same time in atomic scenario, multiple queues > are required. As l3fwd supports multiple queues, it seems legitimate to add the support. > > Thanks, > Nipun > > > How would increasing Rx queues help? Distributing flows from single event > > queue to multiple event ports is the responsibility > > of Event device as per spec. > > Does DPAA/2 function differently? > > > > Regards, > > Pavan. > > > > >Regards, > > >Nipun > > > > > >> > > >> > > > >> >Regards, > > >> >Nipun > > >> > > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Pavan.