Re: [dpdk-dev] dmadev discussion summary

[Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>]

On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 5:54 PM Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
>
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Jerin Jacob
> > Sent: Saturday, 3 July 2021 11.09
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 2:23 PM Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > From: fengchengwen [mailto:fengchengwen@huawei.com]
> > > > Sent: Saturday, 3 July 2021 02.32
> > > >
> > > > On 2021/7/2 22:57, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > >> In the DPDK framework, many data-plane API names contain queues.
> > > > e.g.
> > > > >> eventdev/crypto..
> > > > >> The concept of virt queues has continuity.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was also wondering about the name "virtual queue".
> > > > >
> > > > > Usually, something "virtual" would be an abstraction of something
> > > > physical, e.g. a software layer on top of something physical.
> > > > >
> > > > > Back in the days, a "DMA channel" used to mean a DMA engine on a
> > CPU.
> > > > If a CPU had 2 DMA channels, they could both be set up
> > simultaneously.
> > > > >
> > > > > The current design has the "dmadev" representing a CPU or other
> > chip,
> > > > which has one or more "HW-queues" representing DMA channels (of the
> > > > same type), and then "virt-queue" as a software abstraction on top,
> > for
> > > > using a DMA channel in different ways through individually
> > configured
> > > > contexts (virt-queues).
> > > > >
> > > > > It makes sense to me, although I would consider renaming "HW-
> > queue"
> > > > to "channel" and perhaps "virt-queue" to "queue".
> > > >
> > > > The 'DMA channel' is more used than 'DMA queue', at least google
> > show
> > > > that there are at least 20+ times more.
> > > >
> > > > It's a good idea build the abstraction layer: queue <> channel <>
> > dma-
> > > > controller.
> > > > In this way, the meaning of each layer is relatively easy to
> > > > distinguish literally.
> > > >
> > > > will fix in V2
> > > >
> > >
> > > After re-reading all the mails in this thread, I have found one more
> > important high level detail still not decided:
> > >
> > > Bruce had suggested flattening the DMA channels, so each dmadev
> > represents a DMA channel. And DMA controllers with multiple DMA
> > channels will have to instantiate multiple dmadevs, one for each DMA
> > channel.
> > >
> > > Just like a four port NIC instantiates four ethdevs.
> > >
> > > Then, like ethdevs, there would only be two abstraction layers:
> > dmadev <> queue, where a dmadev is a DMA channel on a DMA controller.
> > >
> > > However, this assumes that the fast path functions on the individual
> > DMA channels of a DMA controller can be accessed completely
> > independently and simultaneously by multiple threads. (Otherwise, the
> > driver would need to implement critical regions or locking around
> > accessing the common registers in the DMA controller shared by the DMA
> > channels.)
> > >
> > > Unless any of the DMA controller vendors claim that this assumption
> > about independence of the DMA channels is wrong, I strongly support
> > Bruce's flattening suggestion.
> >
> > It is wrong from alteast octeontx2_dma PoV.
> >
> > # The PCI device is DMA controller where the driver/device is
> > mapped.(As device driver is based on PCI bus, We dont want to have
> > vdev for this)
> > # The PCI device has HW queue(s)
> > # Each HW queue has different channels.
> >
> > In the current configuration, we have only one queue per device and it
> > has 4 channels. 4 channels are not threaded safe as it is based on
> > single queue.
>
> Please clarify "current configuration": Is that a configuration modifiable by changing some software/driver, or is it the chip that was built that way in the RTL code?

We have 8 queues per SoC, Based on some of HW versions it can be
configured as (a) or (b) using FW settings.
a) One PCI devices with 8 Queues
b) 8 PCI devices with each one has one queue.

Everyone is using mode (b) as it helps 8 different applications to use
DMA as if one application binds the PCI device other applications can
not use the same PCI device.
If one application needs 8 queues, it is possible that 8 dmadevice can
be bound to a single application with mode (b).


I think, in above way we can flatten to <device> <> <channel/queue>

>
> >
> > I think, if we need to flatten it, I think, it makes sense to have
> > dmadev <> channel (and each channel can have thread-safe capability
> > based on how it mapped on HW queues based on the device driver
> > capability).
>
> The key question is how many threads can independently call data-plane dmadev functions (rte_dma_copy() etc.) simultaneously. If I understand your explanation correctly, only one - because you only have one DMA device, and all access to it goes through a single hardware queue.
>
> I just realized that although you only have one DMA Controller with only one HW queue, your four DMA channels allows four sequentially initiated transactions to be running simultaneously. Does the application have any benefit by knowing that the dmadev can have multiple ongoing transactions, or can the fast-path dmadev API hide that ability?

In my view it is better to hide and I have similar proposal at
http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2021-July/213141.html
--------------
>   7) Because data-plane APIs are not thread-safe, and user could determine
>      virt-queue to HW-queue's map (at the queue-setup stage), so it is user's
>      duty to ensure thread-safe.

+1. But I am not sure how easy for the fast-path application to have this logic,
Instead, I think, it is better to tell the capa for queue by driver
and in channel configuration,
the application can request for requirement (Is multiple producers enq
to the same HW queue or not).
Based on the request, the implementation can pick the correct function
pointer for enq.(lock vs lockless version if HW does not support
lockless)

------------------------
>