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 A9FE6A0547; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 18:14:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5190840E28; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 18:14:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-il1-f170.google.com (mail-il1-f170.google.com [209.85.166.170]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1EF14068B for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 18:14:21 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-il1-f170.google.com with SMTP id e13so16474840ilc.1 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 09:14:21 -0700 (PDT) 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=cl8u4WK40eoJyoDac8gRC/oiHyKlvRThdr46NFIEcHM=; b=kcAQCknpUrFlTclZzT4DrMbXElUNyktzHm7nlzQrgLxx0Q9+zKjB/NDtj0Ox7w1J/l kCmxTBtzeBLlPwIs6JWhpQSEYudBIzNHf14bUqwklwN3Fqdrow1Jsz8FNhafwUSYfNna esTNvIF+4HkSceHsqmELv1dvY7kmNrlaPsvFpATxbTFyq0woNLja34eHWxGV56tOD670 QfuLIiVMa9ckqcNu1jSOUk6TKlHN22PGRL/94sT/FPRXgwJsf3K1fD8QEJcrLFZv6qOD Rw6BFzbF4u/9CU7SZEHQHjYd2a/NxUEY1l9XrNOUmY5uUrz4yiuq5Fhw2kvb5d5rSRSU D5kA== 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=cl8u4WK40eoJyoDac8gRC/oiHyKlvRThdr46NFIEcHM=; b=K1JbJh8PxGwe6NiUK8J5o8OFfXzQxgMtUc0uTxzo1kgutgOqiXlUxKhaWGxqstRRg9 pRcp4ONk9bJPrq9ByLf4/Z7c77kZgpBMnnGKSnZU61og2MhVWBNQsyZPOJaUyTDlfKf1 xeTD4xh5tspLVEeE/xssz5HlCl1JN/M0+iuMo7w9CMafiwZgT/+/1NVdjmaW1iOIg6Mf FXAG83Pmd02kTbtQl+pUgR4SUPR+qtIDuup+tm/Owf+2CNcED/NkI5Uzauh5vpxFMbYq dZTBByI+SqitdNFOdX9Wu+PcKFAWw5ezco0ssqlcmZhkVcBzPGSwWP0TQYELED2Hw3Hx rN/A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532lLnKimQlpsTACqWhHNW2DrRBMx3yTFMIApSWA4rLZimfyrxY9 eThY/bSCusRs10IhMhhS6u3l8oR52wjhbTqzCW8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZKqk1Wm7A0ZtVbOxT37M+EP78QHw2Oh0W98A1auCpTSY+E6+6fO3vju2xTy7kUW7hidtHCtMsZxnNOO+tthQ= X-Received: by 2002:a92:bf0b:: with SMTP id z11mr18415253ilh.60.1626711261232; Mon, 19 Jul 2021 09:14:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210716170236.2297967-1-ganapati.kundapura@intel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jerin Jacob Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2021 21:43:55 +0530 Message-ID: To: "Kundapura, Ganapati" Cc: "Jayatheerthan, Jay" , dpdk-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eventdev: configure the Rx event buffer size 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 Sender: "dev" On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 8:57 PM Kundapura, Ganapati wrote: > > Hi Jerin, HI Ganapati > Please find my response in lined. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jerin Jacob > Sent: 19 July 2021 12:14 > To: Kundapura, Ganapati > Cc: Jayatheerthan, Jay ; dpdk-dev > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eventdev: configure the Rx event buffer size > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 10:33 PM Ganapati Kundapura wrote: > > > > As of now Rx event buffer size is static and set to 128. > > > > This patch sets the Rx event buffer size to 192, configurable at > > compile time and also errors out at run time if Rx event buffer size > > is configured more than 16 bits. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ganapati Kundapura > > --- > > config/rte_config.h | 1 + > > lib/eventdev/rte_event_eth_rx_adapter.c | 14 +++++++++++++- > > 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/config/rte_config.h b/config/rte_config.h index > > 590903c..3d938c8 100644 > > --- a/config/rte_config.h > > +++ b/config/rte_config.h > > @@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ > > #define RTE_EVENT_ETH_INTR_RING_SIZE 1024 #define > > RTE_EVENT_CRYPTO_ADAPTER_MAX_INSTANCE 32 #define > > RTE_EVENT_ETH_TX_ADAPTER_MAX_INSTANCE 32 > > +#define RTE_EVENT_ETH_RX_ADAPTER_BUFFER_SIZE 128 > > We are limiting any configuration to rte_config.h file. > Could you make it dynamic with the default value and application can pass the value kind of scheme? > [Ganapati] > Making the Rx event buffer size dynamic seems to be a good idea but in case of rx adapter, > either passing event buffer size to adapter create api requires api signature change which breaks ABI > or by adding event buffer size in port_config parameter which comes from eventdev > to adapter create function is not scalable as user can also call create_ext() with its own callback > and parameter to callback is void * which is interpreted by user space callback function. > > I think one way to do the event buffer size dynamic is to add new api to set the event buffer size. > If called, it'll set the event buffer size to the value passed otherwise rx adapter instance create api will do with > default value. > > Let me know your opinion on this. we can break the ABI in v21.11 so create API config structure can change. Please send depreciation notice and submit the implementation for 21.11, >