[dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Based on discussion done in [1], this patchset reorganizes the mbuf.

The main changes are:
- reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
  platforms.
- add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
- m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
  in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
  2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
- change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
- move seqn in the 2nd cache line

Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
- move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
  them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
  it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
- remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
  and some people highlighted they are using it.
- moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
  it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
- merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
  were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
  so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.

I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression, but
the patchset requires more testing.

[1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html


Jerin Jacob (1):
  mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned

Olivier Matz (7):
  mbuf: make segment prefree function public
  mbuf: make raw free function public
  mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
  net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
  mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
  mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
  mbuf: add a timestamp field

 app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
 drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
 drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
 drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
 drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   3 -
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
 .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 114 ++++++++++++++++-----
 19 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 98 deletions(-)

-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/8] mbuf: make segment prefree function public

[Olivier Matz]

Document the function and make it public, since it is used at several
places in the drivers. The old one is marked as deprecated.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c              |  2 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c            |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c        |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h   |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c            |  2 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h   |  6 +++---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 8 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
index 26b83ae..f8c8ad0 100644
--- a/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
@@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ static inline void enic_free_wq_bufs(struct vnic_wq *wq, u16 completed_index)
 	pool = ((struct rte_mbuf *)buf->mb)->pool;
 	for (i = 0; i < nb_to_free; i++) {
 		buf = &wq->bufs[tail_idx];
-		m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg((struct rte_mbuf *)(buf->mb));
+		m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg((struct rte_mbuf *)(buf->mb));
 		buf->mb = NULL;
 
 		if (unlikely(m == NULL)) {
diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
index 144e5e6..c9bb04a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
@@ -434,12 +434,12 @@ static inline void tx_free_bulk_mbuf(struct rte_mbuf **txep, int num)
 	if (unlikely(num == 0))
 		return;
 
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < num; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -455,7 +455,7 @@ static inline void tx_free_bulk_mbuf(struct rte_mbuf **txep, int num)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < num; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 			txep[i] = NULL;
diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
index 27f3e43..825e3c1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
@@ -754,12 +754,12 @@ fm10k_tx_free_bufs(struct fm10k_tx_queue *txq)
 	 * next_dd - (rs_thresh-1)
 	 */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring[txq->next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ fm10k_tx_free_bufs(struct fm10k_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
index 3745558..76031fe 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ i40e_tx_free_bufs(struct i40e_tx_queue *txq)
 	  * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
 	  */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring[txq->tx_next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool)) {
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ i40e_tx_free_bufs(struct i40e_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
index 36f1c02..dd53cc6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 
 	for (i = 0; i < txq->tx_rs_thresh; ++i, ++txep) {
 		/* free buffers one at a time */
-		m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep->mbuf);
+		m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep->mbuf);
 		txep->mbuf = NULL;
 
 		if (unlikely(m == NULL))
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
index a3473b9..a83afe5 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 	 * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
 	 */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring_v[txq->tx_next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
index b08f859..f531c54 100644
--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
@@ -98,13 +98,13 @@ virtio_xmit_cleanup(struct virtqueue *vq)
 	desc_idx = (uint16_t)(vq->vq_used_cons_idx &
 		   ((vq->vq_nentries >> 1) - 1));
 	m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < VIRTIO_TX_FREE_NR; i++) {
 			m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ virtio_xmit_cleanup(struct virtqueue *vq)
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < VIRTIO_TX_FREE_NR; i++) {
 			m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index bfce9f4..73b79c0 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -1212,8 +1212,23 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
 }
 
-static inline struct rte_mbuf* __attribute__((always_inline))
-__rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+/**
+ * Decrease reference counter and unlink a mbuf segment
+ *
+ * This function does the same than a free, except that it does not
+ * return the segment to its pool.
+ * It decreases the reference counter, and if it reaches 0, it is
+ * detached from its parent for an indirect mbuf.
+ *
+ * @param m
+ *   The mbuf to be unlinked
+ * @return
+ *   - (m) if it is the last reference. It can be recycled or freed.
+ *   - (NULL) if the mbuf still has remaining references on it.
+ */
+__attribute__((always_inline))
+static inline struct rte_mbuf *
+rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
@@ -1226,6 +1241,14 @@ __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	return NULL;
 }
 
+/* deprecated, replaced by rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() */
+__rte_deprecated
+static inline struct rte_mbuf *
+__rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+{
+	return rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+}
+
 /**
  * Free a segment of a packet mbuf into its original mempool.
  *
@@ -1238,7 +1261,8 @@ __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
-	if (likely(NULL != (m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m)))) {
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		m->next = NULL;
 		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 	}
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/8] mbuf: make raw free function public

[Olivier Matz]

Rename __rte_mbuf_raw_free() as rte_mbuf_raw_free() and make
it public. The old function is kept for compat but is marked as
deprecated.

The next commit changes the behavior of rte_mbuf_raw_free() to
make it more consistent with rte_mbuf_raw_alloc().

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c     |  2 +-
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  2 +-
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
index 8497cd7..4aac6a9 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
@@ -685,7 +685,7 @@ static void ena_rx_queue_release_bufs(struct ena_ring *ring)
 			ring->rx_buffer_info[ring->next_to_clean & ring_mask];
 
 		if (m)
-			__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+			rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 
 		ring->next_to_clean++;
 	}
diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
index 56c7f78..a518a42 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
@@ -1328,7 +1328,7 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 				assert(pkt != (*rxq->elts)[idx]);
 				rep = NEXT(pkt);
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(pkt, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
 				pkt = rep;
 			}
 			break;
@@ -1339,13 +1339,13 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 					       &rss_hash_res);
 			if (!len) {
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				break;
 			}
 			if (unlikely(len == -1)) {
 				/* RX error, packet is likely too large. */
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				++rxq->stats.idropped;
 				goto skip;
 			}
diff --git a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
index 7bbd168..eedc0b3 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
@@ -549,7 +549,7 @@ mpipe_recv_flush_stack(struct mpipe_dev_priv *priv)
 		mbuf->data_len    = 0;
 		mbuf->pkt_len     = 0;
 
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(mbuf);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(mbuf);
 	}
 }
 
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 73b79c0..8ff2290 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -788,20 +788,30 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 }
 
 /**
- * @internal Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
- * The use of that function is reserved for RTE internal needs.
- * Please use rte_pktmbuf_free().
+ * Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
+ *
+ * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and that the
+ * reference counter is 0.
  *
  * @param m
  *   The mbuf to be freed.
  */
 static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
-__rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
+	RTE_ASSERT(RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m));
 	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
 	rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 }
 
+/* compat with older versions */
+__rte_deprecated
+static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
+__rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+{
+	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+}
+
 /* Operations on ctrl mbuf */
 
 /**
@@ -1209,7 +1219,7 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m->ol_flags = 0;
 
 	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1264,7 +1274,7 @@ rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		m->next = NULL;
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 	}
 }
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 3/8] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

[Olivier Matz]

Set the value of m->refcnt to 1, m->nb_segs to 1 and m->next
to NULL when the mbuf is stored inside the mempool (unused).
This is done in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), before freeing or
recycling a mbuf.

Before this patch, the value of m->refcnt was expected to be 0
while in pool.

The objectives are:

- to avoid drivers to set m->next to NULL in the early Rx path, since
  this field is in the second 64B of the mbuf and its access could
  trigger a cache miss

- rationalize the behavior of raw_alloc/raw_free: one is now the
  symmetric of the other, and refcnt is never changed in these functions.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  5 ++---
 drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  1 +
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c       |  2 ++
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
index a518a42..294dfde 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
@@ -1327,7 +1327,8 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 			while (pkt != seg) {
 				assert(pkt != (*rxq->elts)[idx]);
 				rep = NEXT(pkt);
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(pkt, 0);
+				NEXT(pkt) = NULL;
+				NB_SEGS(pkt) = 1;
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
 				pkt = rep;
 			}
@@ -1338,13 +1339,11 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 			len = mlx5_rx_poll_len(rxq, cqe, cqe_cnt,
 					       &rss_hash_res);
 			if (!len) {
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				break;
 			}
 			if (unlikely(len == -1)) {
 				/* RX error, packet is likely too large. */
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				++rxq->stats.idropped;
 				goto skip;
diff --git a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
index eedc0b3..560ffe9 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
@@ -548,6 +548,7 @@ mpipe_recv_flush_stack(struct mpipe_dev_priv *priv)
 		mbuf->packet_type = 0;
 		mbuf->data_len    = 0;
 		mbuf->pkt_len     = 0;
+		mbuf->next        = NULL;
 
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(mbuf);
 	}
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
index 72ad91e..0acc810 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
@@ -145,6 +145,8 @@ rte_pktmbuf_init(struct rte_mempool *mp,
 	m->pool = mp;
 	m->nb_segs = 1;
 	m->port = 0xff;
+	rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+	m->next = NULL;
 }
 
 /* helper to create a mbuf pool */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 8ff2290..bbd0700 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -766,6 +766,11 @@ rte_mbuf_sanity_check(const struct rte_mbuf *m, int is_header);
  * initializing all the required fields. See rte_pktmbuf_reset().
  * For standard needs, prefer rte_pktmbuf_alloc().
  *
+ * The caller can expect that the following fields of the mbuf structure
+ * are initialized: buf_addr, buf_physaddr, buf_len, refcnt=1, nb_segs=1,
+ * next=NULL, pool, priv_size. The other fields must be initialized
+ * by the caller.
+ *
  * @param mp
  *   The mempool from which mbuf is allocated.
  * @return
@@ -780,8 +785,9 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 	if (rte_mempool_get(mp, &mb) < 0)
 		return NULL;
 	m = (struct rte_mbuf *)mb;
-	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
-	rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->next == NULL);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->nb_segs == 1);
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
 	return m;
@@ -790,8 +796,13 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 /**
  * Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
  *
- * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and that the
- * reference counter is 0.
+ * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and properly
+ * reinitialized (refcnt=1, next=NULL, nb_segs=1), as done by
+ * rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
+ *
+ * This function should be used with care, when optimization is
+ * required. For standard needs, prefer rte_pktmbuf_free() or
+ * rte_pktmbuf_free_seg().
  *
  * @param m
  *   The mbuf to be freed.
@@ -800,13 +811,16 @@ static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	RTE_ASSERT(RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m));
-	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
+	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->next == NULL);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->nb_segs == 1);
+	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 	rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 }
 
 /* compat with older versions */
 __rte_deprecated
-static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
+static inline void
 __rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
@@ -1218,8 +1232,12 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m->data_len = 0;
 	m->ol_flags = 0;
 
-	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
+	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0) {
+		md->next = NULL;
+		md->nb_segs = 1;
+		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(md, 1);
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
+	}
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1243,9 +1261,14 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
 	if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0)) {
-		/* if this is an indirect mbuf, it is detached. */
-		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
+		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m)) {
 			rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
+			/* next, nb_segs, refcnt are reset */
+		} else {
+			m->next = NULL;
+			m->nb_segs = 1;
+			rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+		}
 		return m;
 	}
 	return NULL;
@@ -1272,10 +1295,8 @@ static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
-	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
-		m->next = NULL;
+	if (likely(m != NULL))
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
-	}
 }
 
 /**
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 4/8] net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx

[Olivier Matz]

Now that the m->next pointer and m->nb_segs is expected to be set (to
NULL and 1 respectively) after a mempool_get(), we can avoid to write them
in the Rx functions of drivers.

Only some drivers are patched, it's not an exhaustive patch. It gives
the idea to do the same in other drivers.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 6 ------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c          | 8 --------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c | 6 ------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c  | 6 ------
 drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c         | 2 --
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c        | 3 ---
 6 files changed, 31 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 7c84a41..33bc121 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -403,12 +403,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct i40e_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			/* store the resulting 32-bit value */
 			*(int *)split_packet = _mm_cvtsi128_si32(eop_bits);
 			split_packet += RTE_I40E_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		/* C.3 calc available number of desc */
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
index dd53cc6..2c9e342 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
@@ -1548,8 +1548,6 @@ ixgbe_rx_alloc_bufs(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, bool reset_mbuf)
 		/* populate the static rte mbuf fields */
 		mb = rxep[i].mbuf;
 		if (reset_mbuf) {
-			mb->next = NULL;
-			mb->nb_segs = 1;
 			mb->port = rxq->port_id;
 		}
 
@@ -2157,12 +2155,6 @@ ixgbe_recv_pkts_lro(void *rx_queue, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts, uint16_t nb_pkts,
 			goto next_desc;
 		}
 
-		/*
-		 * This is the last buffer of the received packet - return
-		 * the current cluster to the user.
-		 */
-		rxm->next = NULL;
-
 		/* Initialize the first mbuf of the returned packet */
 		ixgbe_fill_cluster_head_buf(first_seg, &rxd, rxq, staterr);
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index f96cc85..63f2556 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -333,12 +333,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			*(int *)split_packet = ~stat & IXGBE_VPMD_DESC_EOP_MASK;
 
 			split_packet += RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		rte_prefetch_non_temporal(rxdp + RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP);
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index abbf284..65c5da3 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -425,12 +425,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			/* store the resulting 32-bit value */
 			*(int *)split_packet = _mm_cvtsi128_si32(eop_bits);
 			split_packet += RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		/* C.3 calc available number of desc */
diff --git a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
index 57203e2..7e14da0 100644
--- a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
+++ b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
@@ -112,8 +112,6 @@ eth_null_rx(void *q, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, uint16_t nb_bufs)
 			break;
 		bufs[i]->data_len = (uint16_t)packet_size;
 		bufs[i]->pkt_len = packet_size;
-		bufs[i]->nb_segs = 1;
-		bufs[i]->next = NULL;
 		bufs[i]->port = h->internals->port_id;
 	}
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
index b29565e..111a983 100644
--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
@@ -761,7 +761,6 @@ virtio_recv_pkts(void *rx_queue, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts, uint16_t nb_pkts)
 		rxm->vlan_tci = 0;
 
 		rxm->nb_segs = 1;
-		rxm->next = NULL;
 		rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[i] - hdr_size);
 		rxm->data_len = (uint16_t)(len[i] - hdr_size);
 
@@ -888,7 +887,6 @@ virtio_recv_mergeable_pkts(void *rx_queue,
 
 		rxm->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;
 		rxm->nb_segs = seg_num;
-		rxm->next = NULL;
 		rxm->ol_flags = 0;
 		rxm->vlan_tci = 0;
 		rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[0] - hdr_size);
@@ -933,7 +931,6 @@ virtio_recv_mergeable_pkts(void *rx_queue,
 				rxm = rcv_pkts[extra_idx];
 
 				rxm->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM - hdr_size;
-				rxm->next = NULL;
 				rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[extra_idx]);
 				rxm->data_len = (uint16_t)(len[extra_idx]);
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 5/8] mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned

[Olivier Matz]

From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>

To avoid multiple stores on fast path, Ethernet drivers
aggregate the writes to data_off, refcnt, nb_segs and port
to an uint64_t data and write the data in one shot
with uint64_t* at &mbuf->rearm_data address.

Some of the non-IA platforms have store operation overhead
if the store address is not naturally aligned.This patch
fixes the performance issue on those targets.

Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                            | 3 ---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c                          | 5 +----
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c                       | 3 ---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c                        | 3 ---
 lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h | 3 +--
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                                    | 6 +++---
 6 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
index 825e3c1..61a65e9 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
@@ -324,9 +324,6 @@ fm10k_rxq_rearm(struct fm10k_rx_queue *rxq)
 
 		/* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 33bc121..1a8bcdf 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -87,11 +87,8 @@ i40e_rxq_rearm(struct i40e_rx_queue *rxq)
 		mb0 = rxep[0].mbuf;
 		mb1 = rxep[1].mbuf;
 
-		 /* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
+		/* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index 63f2556..c538796 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -85,9 +85,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		/*
 		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		vst1_u8((uint8_t *)&mb0->rearm_data, p);
 		paddr = mb0->buf_physaddr + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 65c5da3..62afe31 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -90,9 +90,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		/*
 		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
index 09713b0..f24f79f 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
@@ -116,11 +116,10 @@ struct rte_kni_fifo {
 struct rte_kni_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr __attribute__((__aligned__(RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE)));
 	uint64_t buf_physaddr;
-	char pad0[2];
 	uint16_t data_off;      /**< Start address of data in segment buffer. */
 	char pad1[2];
 	uint8_t nb_segs;        /**< Number of segments. */
-	char pad4[1];
+	char pad4[3];
 	uint64_t ol_flags;      /**< Offload features. */
 	char pad2[4];
 	uint32_t pkt_len;       /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segment data_len. */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index bbd0700..cac31c9 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -391,10 +391,8 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr;           /**< Virtual address of segment buffer. */
 	phys_addr_t buf_physaddr; /**< Physical address of segment buffer. */
 
-	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
-
 	/* next 6 bytes are initialised on RX descriptor rearm */
-	MARKER8 rearm_data;
+	MARKER64 rearm_data;
 	uint16_t data_off;
 
 	/**
@@ -412,6 +410,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	};
 	uint8_t nb_segs;          /**< Number of segments. */
 	uint8_t port;             /**< Input port. */
+	uint16_t pad;             /**< 2B pad for naturally aligned ol_flags */
 
 	uint64_t ol_flags;        /**< Offload features. */
 
@@ -472,6 +471,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
+	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
 	/* second cache line - fields only used in slow path or on TX */
 	MARKER cacheline1 __rte_cache_min_aligned;
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Olivier Matz]

It is now possible to reference a port identifier larger than 256
and have a mbuf chain larger than 256 segments.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                                       | 4 ++--
 lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h | 4 ++--
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                                    | 5 ++---
 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
index 88cc842..5eaff9b 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
@@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ pkt_copy_split(const struct rte_mbuf *pkt)
 		rc = mbuf_copy_split(pkt, md, seglen, nb_seg);
 		if (rc < 0)
 			RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1,
-				"mbuf_copy_split for %p(len=%u, nb_seg=%hhu) "
+				"mbuf_copy_split for %p(len=%u, nb_seg=%u) "
 				"into %u segments failed with error code: %d\n",
 				pkt, pkt->pkt_len, pkt->nb_segs, nb_seg, rc);
 
@@ -801,7 +801,7 @@ pkt_burst_checksum_forward(struct fwd_stream *fs)
 			char buf[256];
 
 			printf("-----------------\n");
-			printf("port=%u, mbuf=%p, pkt_len=%u, nb_segs=%hhu:\n",
+			printf("port=%u, mbuf=%p, pkt_len=%u, nb_segs=%u:\n",
 				fs->rx_port, m, m->pkt_len, m->nb_segs);
 			/* dump rx parsed packet info */
 			rte_get_rx_ol_flag_list(rx_ol_flags, buf, sizeof(buf));
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
index f24f79f..2ac879f 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
@@ -118,8 +118,8 @@ struct rte_kni_mbuf {
 	uint64_t buf_physaddr;
 	uint16_t data_off;      /**< Start address of data in segment buffer. */
 	char pad1[2];
-	uint8_t nb_segs;        /**< Number of segments. */
-	char pad4[3];
+	uint16_t nb_segs;       /**< Number of segments. */
+	char pad4[2];
 	uint64_t ol_flags;      /**< Offload features. */
 	char pad2[4];
 	uint32_t pkt_len;       /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segment data_len. */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index cac31c9..de72314 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -408,9 +408,8 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 		rte_atomic16_t refcnt_atomic; /**< Atomically accessed refcnt */
 		uint16_t refcnt;              /**< Non-atomically accessed refcnt */
 	};
-	uint8_t nb_segs;          /**< Number of segments. */
-	uint8_t port;             /**< Input port. */
-	uint16_t pad;             /**< 2B pad for naturally aligned ol_flags */
+	uint16_t nb_segs;         /**< Number of segments. */
+	uint16_t port;            /**< Input port. */
 
 	uint64_t ol_flags;        /**< Offload features. */
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 7/8] mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line

[Olivier Matz]

Move this field in the second cache line, since no driver use it
in Rx path. The freed space will be used by a timestamp in next
commit.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index de72314..39df3e1 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -465,8 +465,6 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 		uint32_t usr;	  /**< User defined tags. See rte_distributor_process() */
 	} hash;                   /**< hash information */
 
-	uint32_t seqn; /**< Sequence number. See also rte_reorder_insert() */
-
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
@@ -511,6 +509,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 
 	/** Timesync flags for use with IEEE1588. */
 	uint16_t timesync;
+
+	/** Sequence number. See also rte_reorder_insert(). */
+	uint32_t seqn;
+
 } __rte_cache_aligned;
 
 /**
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [RFC 8/8] mbuf: add a timestamp field

[Olivier Matz]

The field itself is not fully described yet, but this commit reserves
the room in the mbuf.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c |  2 ++
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 10 ++++++++++
 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
index 0acc810..f679bce 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
@@ -322,6 +322,7 @@ const char *rte_get_rx_ol_flag_name(uint64_t mask)
 	case PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST: return "PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST";
 	case PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED: return "PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED";
 	case PKT_RX_LRO: return "PKT_RX_LRO";
+	case PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP: return "PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP";
 	default: return NULL;
 	}
 }
@@ -356,6 +357,7 @@ rte_get_rx_ol_flag_list(uint64_t mask, char *buf, size_t buflen)
 		{ PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST, PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST, NULL },
 		{ PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED, PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED, NULL },
 		{ PKT_RX_LRO, PKT_RX_LRO, NULL },
+		{ PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP, PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP, NULL },
 	};
 	const char *name;
 	unsigned int i;
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 39df3e1..4818e2f 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -177,6 +177,11 @@ extern "C" {
  */
 #define PKT_RX_LRO           (1ULL << 16)
 
+/**
+ * Indicate that the timestamp field in the mbuf is valid.
+ */
+#define PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP     (1ULL << 17)
+
 /* add new RX flags here */
 
 /* add new TX flags here */
@@ -469,6 +474,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
 	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
+
+	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit is nanoseconds */
+	uint64_t timestamp;
+
 	/* second cache line - fields only used in slow path or on TX */
 	MARKER cacheline1 __rte_cache_min_aligned;
 
@@ -1197,6 +1206,7 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_attach(struct rte_mbuf *mi, struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	mi->nb_segs = 1;
 	mi->ol_flags = m->ol_flags | IND_ATTACHED_MBUF;
 	mi->packet_type = m->packet_type;
+	mi->timestamp = m->timestamp;
 
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(mi, 1);
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
-- 
2.8.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 3/8] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

[Bruce Richardson]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 04:19:28PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Set the value of m->refcnt to 1, m->nb_segs to 1 and m->next
> to NULL when the mbuf is stored inside the mempool (unused).
> This is done in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), before freeing or
> recycling a mbuf.
> 
> Before this patch, the value of m->refcnt was expected to be 0
> while in pool.
> 
> The objectives are:
> 
> - to avoid drivers to set m->next to NULL in the early Rx path, since
>   this field is in the second 64B of the mbuf and its access could
>   trigger a cache miss
> 
> - rationalize the behavior of raw_alloc/raw_free: one is now the
>   symmetric of the other, and refcnt is never changed in these functions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  5 ++---
>  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  1 +
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c       |  2 ++
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  4 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
<snip>
> /* compat with older versions */
>  __rte_deprecated
> -static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
> +static inline void
>  __rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>  {
>  	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
> @@ -1218,8 +1232,12 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>  	m->data_len = 0;
>  	m->ol_flags = 0;
>  
> -	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
> +	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0) {

Minor nit, but in the case that we only have a single reference to the
mbufs, we are always setting that to zero just to re-increment it to 1
again.

> +		md->next = NULL;
> +		md->nb_segs = 1;
> +		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(md, 1);
>  		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
> +	}
>  }
>  
>  /**

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 04:19:25PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Based on discussion done in [1], this patchset reorganizes the mbuf.
> 

Hi Olivier,

thanks for all the work on this. From a quick scan of the patches, and
the description below, it looks like a good set of changes. Comments
below to see about kick-starting some further discussion about some of
the other changes you propose.

> The main changes are:
> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>   platforms.
> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
>   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
>   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.

But if we do make this change and update the drivers, some of them
should perform a little better, since they do fewer writes. I don't
think the fastest vector drivers will be affected, since they already
coalesce the writes to these fields with other writes, but others drivers
may well be improved by the change.

> - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
>   and some people highlighted they are using it.
> - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
>   it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.

I agree.

> - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
>   were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
>   so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.

What were the use-cases? If we have a timestamp, surely sequence can be
determined from that? Even if you use the TSC as a timestamp per burst,
you can still sequence the packets cheaply by just adding 1 to each 
subsequent value.

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:59:08 +0000, Bruce Richardson
<bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 04:19:25PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > Based on discussion done in [1], this patchset reorganizes the mbuf.
> >   
> 
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> thanks for all the work on this. From a quick scan of the patches, and
> the description below, it looks like a good set of changes. Comments
> below to see about kick-starting some further discussion about some of
> the other changes you propose.
> 
> > The main changes are:
> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >   platforms.
> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
> > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for
> > mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in
> > the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > 
> > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
> >   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance
> > regression, or it would require to change all the drivers, which is
> > not an easy task.  
> 
> But if we do make this change and update the drivers, some of them
> should perform a little better, since they do fewer writes. I don't
> think the fastest vector drivers will be affected, since they already
> coalesce the writes to these fields with other writes, but others
> drivers may well be improved by the change.

Yes, that's something I forgot to say in the cover letter: after this
patchset, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit by removing
writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
idea of what could be done.

Once most drivers are updated, we could reconsider moving nb_segs and
refcnt in the second cache line.

> 
> > - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and
> > libraries, and some people highlighted they are using it.
> > - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room,
> > and having it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need
> > for it.  
> 
> I agree.
> 
> > - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine
> > use cases were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the
> > presence of seqn, so it looks preferable to keep them separated for
> > now.  
> 
> What were the use-cases? If we have a timestamp, surely sequence can
> be determined from that? Even if you use the TSC as a timestamp per
> burst, you can still sequence the packets cheaply by just adding 1 to
> each subsequent value.

Assuming the timestamp is in nanosecond, it is not a sequence number,
so I'm not sure it should be hijacked for this purpose. A timestamp can
be used to reorder packets, but having a sequence number is better
because you can be sure that when you get packets 1, 3, 2, 0 that no
packet is missing between 0 and 3.

For that reason, I guess both features could be used at the same time.

Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Olivier,
Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
Thanks
Konstantin

> 
> The main changes are:
> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>   platforms.
> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line

Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).

> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits

Not that I am completely against it,
but changing nb_segs to 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in future.

> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
>   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or

I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
As I understand thanks to other change (from above) m->refcnt 
will already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.

>   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
>   and some people highlighted they are using it.

Ok, but can it be moved into the second cache-line?

> - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
>   it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
> - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
>   were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
>   so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.
> 
> I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression, but
> the patchset requires more testing.
> 
> [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
> 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Morten Brørup]

> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
> 
> >
> > The main changes are:
> > ...
> > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> 
> Not that I am completely against it,
> but changing nb_segs to 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> future.

If I recall correctly, this was discussed at DPDK Userspace: If mbuf->nb_segs is used for multicasting (or port flooding), it should have the same size as mbuf->port.

Someone please correct me if I'm mixing things up. The mbuf discussion is important!


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Morten Brørup [mailto:mb@smartsharesystems.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 9, 2017 4:20 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> Cc: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
> >
> > >
> > > The main changes are:
> > > ...
> > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> >
> > Not that I am completely against it,
> > but changing nb_segs to 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> > future.
> 
> If I recall correctly, this was discussed at DPDK Userspace: If mbuf->nb_segs is used for multicasting (or port flooding), it should have the
> same size as mbuf->port.
> 
> Someone please correct me if I'm mixing things up. The mbuf discussion is important!

I think that's for refcnt not nb_segs.
Actually a question - does anyone really do use/see a packets that have >=  256 segments?
Konstantin

> 
> 
> Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> - Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Konstantin,

Thanks for the feedback.
Comments inline.


On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
> Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> Thanks
> Konstantin
> 
> > 
> > The main changes are:
> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >   platforms.
> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line  
> 
> Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).

In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st cache
line.

As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib, not
in a PMD rx path.

> > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for
> > mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in
> > the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits  
> 
> Not that I am completely against it,
> but changing nb_segs to 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> future.

In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256 segments for
L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can overflow. It's not
a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is decremented for each segment.
On the other hand, if I enable some sanity checks on mbufs, it
complains because the number of segments is not equal to nb_seg.

There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed recently:
http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/

Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient,
but the application can maintain another structure to accelerate the
access to the middle/end of the list.

Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if required in
the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.


> 
> > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > 
> > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
> >   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance
> > regression, or  
> 
> I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> As I understand thanks to other change (from above) m->refcnt 
> will already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.

Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line once all
PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue some guidelines
to PMD maintainers at the same time the patchset is pushed. Then we can
consider changing it in a future version, in case we need more room in
the 1st mbuf cache line.

> 
> >   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy
> > task.
> > - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and
> > libraries, and some people highlighted they are using it.  
> 
> Ok, but can it be moved into the second cache-line?

I think no: it is set by the PMDs in RX path, it would impact
performance.


> 
> > - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room,
> > and having it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need
> > for it.
> > - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine
> > use cases were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the
> > presence of seqn, so it looks preferable to keep them separated for
> > now.
> > 
> > I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression,
> > but the patchset requires more testing.
> > 
> > [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
> >   

By the way, additional performance tests on this patchset from PMD
vendors would be helpful.


Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 02:48:07PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> Comments inline.
> 
> 
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi Olivier,
> > Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> > Thanks
> > Konstantin
> > 
> > > 
> > > The main changes are:
> > > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> > >   platforms.
> > > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line  
> > 
> > Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).
> 
> In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
> path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st cache
> line.
> 
> As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib, not
> in a PMD rx path.
> 
> > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for
> > > mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in
> > > the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits  
> > 
> > Not that I am completely against it,
> > but changing nb_segs to 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> > future.
> 
> In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256 segments for
> L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can overflow. It's not
> a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is decremented for each segment.
> On the other hand, if I enable some sanity checks on mbufs, it
> complains because the number of segments is not equal to nb_seg.
> 
> There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed recently:
> http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/
> 
> Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient,
> but the application can maintain another structure to accelerate the
> access to the middle/end of the list.
> 
> Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if required in
> the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.
> 
> 
> > 
> > > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > > 
> > > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
> > >   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance
> > > regression, or  
> > 
> > I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> > As I understand thanks to other change (from above) m->refcnt 
> > will already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> > Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.
> 
> Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line once all
> PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue some guidelines
> to PMD maintainers at the same time the patchset is pushed. Then we can
> consider changing it in a future version, in case we need more room in
> the 1st mbuf cache line.
>

If we are changing things, we should really do all that now, rather than
storing up future breaks to mbuf. Worst case, we should plan for it
immediately after the release where we make these changes. Have two
releases that break mbuf immediately after each other - and flagged as
such, but keep it stable thereafter. I don't like having technical debt
on mbuf just after we supposedly "fix" it.

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:46:19 +0000, Bruce Richardson
<bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 02:48:07PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > Hi Konstantin,
> > 
> > Thanks for the feedback.
> > Comments inline.
> > 
> > 
> > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > Hi Olivier,
> > > Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> > > Thanks
> > > Konstantin
> > >   
> > > > 
> > > > The main changes are:
> > > > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> > > > non-ia platforms.
> > > > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line    
> > > 
> > > Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > > How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).  
> > 
> > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
> > path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st
> > cache line.
> > 
> > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib,
> > not in a PMD rx path.
> >   
> > > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for
> > > > mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next
> > > > (located in the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment
> > > > packets.
> > > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits    
> > > 
> > > Not that I am completely against it,
> > > but changing nb_segs to 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> > > future.  
> > 
> > In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256 segments
> > for L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can overflow.
> > It's not a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is decremented for
> > each segment. On the other hand, if I enable some sanity checks on
> > mbufs, it complains because the number of segments is not equal to
> > nb_seg.
> > 
> > There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed
> > recently: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/
> > 
> > Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient,
> > but the application can maintain another structure to accelerate the
> > access to the middle/end of the list.
> > 
> > Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if required in
> > the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.
> > 
> >   
> > >   
> > > > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > > > 
> > > > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > > > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers
> > > > sets them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance
> > > > regression, or    
> > > 
> > > I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> > > As I understand thanks to other change (from above) m->refcnt 
> > > will already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> > > Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.  
> > 
> > Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line once
> > all PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue some
> > guidelines to PMD maintainers at the same time the patchset is
> > pushed. Then we can consider changing it in a future version, in
> > case we need more room in the 1st mbuf cache line.
> >  
> 
> If we are changing things, we should really do all that now, rather
> than storing up future breaks to mbuf. Worst case, we should plan for
> it immediately after the release where we make these changes. Have two
> releases that break mbuf immediately after each other - and flagged as
> such, but keep it stable thereafter. I don't like having technical
> debt on mbuf just after we supposedly "fix" it.

I think there is no need to do this change now. And I don't feel good
with the idea of having a patchset that updates all the PMDs to remove
the access to a field because it moved to the 2nd cache line
(especially thinking about vector PMDs).

That's why I think the plan could be:
- push an updated version of this patchset quickly
- advertise to PMD maintainers "you don't need to set the m->next,
  m->refcnt, and m->nb_segs in the RX path, please update your drivers"
- later, if we need more room in the 1st cache line of the mbuf, we
  can move refcnt and nb_seg, probably without impacting the
  performance.


Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The main changes are:
>> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>> >   platforms.
>> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
>>
>> Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
>> How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).
>
> In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
> path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st cache
> line.
>
> As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib, not
> in a PMD rx path.
>

If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks at
a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I don't
think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and write it
into the mbuf again.

The problem with timestamps is to get the abstraction right wrt the
correction factors and the size of the tick vs. the timestamp in the
events injected. From my perspective it would be better to extract the
handling of timestamp data into a library with PMD specific
implementation of the conversions. That way the normalized timestamp
values can get extracted if they are present. The mbuf itself would
only indicate the presence of timestamp metadata in that case.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Jan,

On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:39 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Olivier Matz
> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> >> >
> >> > The main changes are:
> >> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >> >   platforms.
> >> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line  
> >>
> >> Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> >> How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).  
> >
> > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
> > path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st
> > cache line.
> >
> > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib,
> > not in a PMD rx path.
> >  
> 
> If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
> implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
> works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
> tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks at
> a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I don't
> think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and write it
> into the mbuf again.

From what I've understand, at least it does not work like this for
mellanox NICs: timestamp is a metadata attached to a rx packet. But
maybe they (and other NIC vendors interrested in the feature) can
confirm or not.

> 
> The problem with timestamps is to get the abstraction right wrt the
> correction factors and the size of the tick vs. the timestamp in the
> events injected. From my perspective it would be better to extract the
> handling of timestamp data into a library with PMD specific
> implementation of the conversions. That way the normalized timestamp
> values can get extracted if they are present. The mbuf itself would
> only indicate the presence of timestamp metadata in that case.

I agree however that we need to properly define the meaning of this
field. My idea is:

- the timestamp is in nanosecond
- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the timestamp is
  set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have the same
  reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference
  would not be the same.

I think it's enough for many use cases.
We can later add helpers to compare timestamps with different
references.


Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Nélio Laranjeiro]

Hi Olivier, Jan,

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:51:53AM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> 
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:39 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Olivier Matz
> > <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > >> >
> > >> > The main changes are:
> > >> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> > >> >   platforms.
> > >> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line  
> > >>
> > >> Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > >> How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).  
> > >
> > > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
> > > path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st
> > > cache line.
> > >
> > > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib,
> > > not in a PMD rx path.
> > >  
> > 
> > If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
> > implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
> > works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
> > tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks at
> > a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I don't
> > think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and write it
> > into the mbuf again.
> 
> From what I've understand, at least it does not work like this for
> mellanox NICs: timestamp is a metadata attached to a rx packet. But
> maybe they (and other NIC vendors interrested in the feature) can
> confirm or not.

Olivier is right, this timestamp information is returned by the hardware
as the other fields describing the Rx packet (length, RSS hash, checksum
...).  The PMD only copy it into the Mbuf.

> > The problem with timestamps is to get the abstraction right wrt the
> > correction factors and the size of the tick vs. the timestamp in the
> > events injected. From my perspective it would be better to extract the
> > handling of timestamp data into a library with PMD specific
> > implementation of the conversions. That way the normalized timestamp
> > values can get extracted if they are present. The mbuf itself would
> > only indicate the presence of timestamp metadata in that case.
> 
> I agree however that we need to properly define the meaning of this
> field. My idea is:
> 
> - the timestamp is in nanosecond
> - the reference is always the same for a given path: if the timestamp is
>   set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have the same
>   reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference
>   would not be the same.
> 
> I think it's enough for many use cases.
> We can later add helpers to compare timestamps with different
> references.
> 
> Regards,
> Olivier

Regards,

-- 
Nélio Laranjeiro
6WIND

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:39 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Olivier Matz
>> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
>> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > The main changes are:
>> >> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>> >> >   platforms.
>> >> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
>> >>
>> >> Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
>> >> How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).
>> >
>> > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
>> > path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st
>> > cache line.
>> >
>> > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib,
>> > not in a PMD rx path.
>> >
>>
>> If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
>> implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
>> works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
>> tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks at
>> a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I don't
>> think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and write it
>> into the mbuf again.
>
> From what I've understand, at least it does not work like this for
> mellanox NICs: timestamp is a metadata attached to a rx packet. But
> maybe they (and other NIC vendors interrested in the feature) can
> confirm or not.
>

Mellanox NICs use a 48bit cycle counter split into a high and low
part. To convert the cycle values into a timestamp you need to
initialize and maintainer a timecounter that shifts the cycle count
e.g. nanosecs. IIRC Mellanox doesn't generate explicit clock events
but the cycle counter is large enough so that the user can easily
maintain the timecounter by manually updating it.

>>
>> The problem with timestamps is to get the abstraction right wrt the
>> correction factors and the size of the tick vs. the timestamp in the
>> events injected. From my perspective it would be better to extract the
>> handling of timestamp data into a library with PMD specific
>> implementation of the conversions. That way the normalized timestamp
>> values can get extracted if they are present. The mbuf itself would
>> only indicate the presence of timestamp metadata in that case.
>
> I agree however that we need to properly define the meaning of this
> field. My idea is:
>
> - the timestamp is in nanosecond
> - the reference is always the same for a given path: if the timestamp is
>   set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have the same
>   reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference
>   would not be the same.
>
> I think it's enough for many use cases.
> We can later add helpers to compare timestamps with different
> references.

My point is that I still doubt that it belongs into the first
cacheline. It requires accessing other structures for converting into
nanoseconds anyway. Optimally I would like to see this happening on
access instead but if that isn't achievable at least in a second step.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Nélio Laranjeiro
<nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com> wrote:
> Hi Olivier, Jan,
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:51:53AM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:39 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
>> > implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
>> > works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
>> > tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks at
>> > a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I don't
>> > think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and write it
>> > into the mbuf again.
>>
>> From what I've understand, at least it does not work like this for
>> mellanox NICs: timestamp is a metadata attached to a rx packet. But
>> maybe they (and other NIC vendors interrested in the feature) can
>> confirm or not.
>
> Olivier is right, this timestamp information is returned by the hardware
> as the other fields describing the Rx packet (length, RSS hash, checksum
> ...).  The PMD only copy it into the Mbuf.
>

Indeed, for Mellanox the timestamp is stored in the CQ entry.
Solarflares write it relative to the packet header.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Jan,

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:38:32 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Olivier Matz
> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:39 +0100, Jan Blunck
> > <jblunck@infradead.org> wrote:  
> >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Olivier Matz
> >> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:  
> >> > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> >> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The main changes are:
> >> >> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> >> >> > non-ia platforms.
> >> >> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line  
> >> >>
> >> >> Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> >> >> How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).  
> >> >
> >> > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the
> >> > Rx path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the
> >> > 1st cache line.
> >> >
> >> > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a
> >> > lib, not in a PMD rx path.
> >> >  
> >>
> >> If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
> >> implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
> >> works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
> >> tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks
> >> at a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I
> >> don't think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and
> >> write it into the mbuf again.  
> >
> > From what I've understand, at least it does not work like this for
> > mellanox NICs: timestamp is a metadata attached to a rx packet. But
> > maybe they (and other NIC vendors interrested in the feature) can
> > confirm or not.
> >  
> 
> Mellanox NICs use a 48bit cycle counter split into a high and low
> part. To convert the cycle values into a timestamp you need to
> initialize and maintainer a timecounter that shifts the cycle count
> e.g. nanosecs. IIRC Mellanox doesn't generate explicit clock events
> but the cycle counter is large enough so that the user can easily
> maintain the timecounter by manually updating it.
> 
> >>
> >> The problem with timestamps is to get the abstraction right wrt the
> >> correction factors and the size of the tick vs. the timestamp in
> >> the events injected. From my perspective it would be better to
> >> extract the handling of timestamp data into a library with PMD
> >> specific implementation of the conversions. That way the
> >> normalized timestamp values can get extracted if they are present.
> >> The mbuf itself would only indicate the presence of timestamp
> >> metadata in that case.  
> >
> > I agree however that we need to properly define the meaning of this
> > field. My idea is:
> >
> > - the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > - the reference is always the same for a given path: if the
> > timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
> > the same reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the
> > reference would not be the same.
> >
> > I think it's enough for many use cases.
> > We can later add helpers to compare timestamps with different
> > references.  
> 
> My point is that I still doubt that it belongs into the first
> cacheline. It requires accessing other structures for converting into
> nanoseconds anyway. Optimally I would like to see this happening on
> access instead but if that isn't achievable at least in a second step.

Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the timestamp
usage in a PMD is as following:

rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
{
	unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
	unsigned port = rxq->port;

	for each hw_desc {
		m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
		m->len = hw_desc->len;
		m->port = port;
		m->ol_flags = 
		...
		m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
	}
	...
}

In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.


Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi guys,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 2:17 PM
> To: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> Hi Jan,
> 
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 14:38:32 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:51 AM, Olivier Matz
> > <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Jan,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:39 +0100, Jan Blunck
> > > <jblunck@infradead.org> wrote:
> > >> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 2:48 PM, Olivier Matz
> > >> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > >> > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > >> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > The main changes are:
> > >> >> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> > >> >> > non-ia platforms.
> > >> >> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > >> >> How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).
> > >> >
> > >> > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the
> > >> > Rx path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the
> > >> > 1st cache line.
> > >> >
> > >> > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a
> > >> > lib, not in a PMD rx path.
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
> > >> implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
> > >> works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
> > >> tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks
> > >> at a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I
> > >> don't think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and
> > >> write it into the mbuf again.
> > >
> > > From what I've understand, at least it does not work like this for
> > > mellanox NICs: timestamp is a metadata attached to a rx packet. But
> > > maybe they (and other NIC vendors interrested in the feature) can
> > > confirm or not.
> > >
> >
> > Mellanox NICs use a 48bit cycle counter split into a high and low
> > part. To convert the cycle values into a timestamp you need to
> > initialize and maintainer a timecounter that shifts the cycle count
> > e.g. nanosecs. IIRC Mellanox doesn't generate explicit clock events
> > but the cycle counter is large enough so that the user can easily
> > maintain the timecounter by manually updating it.
> >
> > >>
> > >> The problem with timestamps is to get the abstraction right wrt the
> > >> correction factors and the size of the tick vs. the timestamp in
> > >> the events injected. From my perspective it would be better to
> > >> extract the handling of timestamp data into a library with PMD
> > >> specific implementation of the conversions. That way the
> > >> normalized timestamp values can get extracted if they are present.
> > >> The mbuf itself would only indicate the presence of timestamp
> > >> metadata in that case.
> > >
> > > I agree however that we need to properly define the meaning of this
> > > field. My idea is:
> > >
> > > - the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > > - the reference is always the same for a given path: if the
> > > timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
> > > the same reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the
> > > reference would not be the same.
> > >
> > > I think it's enough for many use cases.
> > > We can later add helpers to compare timestamps with different
> > > references.
> >
> > My point is that I still doubt that it belongs into the first
> > cacheline. It requires accessing other structures for converting into
> > nanoseconds anyway. Optimally I would like to see this happening on
> > access instead but if that isn't achievable at least in a second step.
> 
> Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the timestamp
> usage in a PMD is as following:
> 
> rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
> {
> 	unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
> 	unsigned port = rxq->port;
> 
> 	for each hw_desc {
> 		m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
> 		m->len = hw_desc->len;
> 		m->port = port;
> 		m->ol_flags =
> 		...
> 		m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
> 	}
> 	...
> }
> 
> In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.

So you are saying that:
- for some HW that DPDK supports (mlx?) timestamp information
Is available in HW RX descriptor
- and as soon timestamp field will be available in mbuf, you plan
to populate it using this HW RXD field.
Is that so?
Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Andrew Rybchenko]

On 02/17/2017 04:51 PM, Jan Blunck wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 1:49 PM, Nélio Laranjeiro
> <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com> wrote:
>> Hi Olivier, Jan,
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:51:53AM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
>>> Hi Jan,
>>>
>>> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 18:26:39 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>> If we talk about setting the timestamp value in the RX path this
>>>> implicitly means software timestamps. Hardware timestamping usually
>>>> works by letting the hardware inject sync events for coarse time
>>>> tracking and additionally injecting fine granular per-packet ticks at
>>>> a specific offset in the packet. Out of performance reasons I don't
>>>> think it makes sense to extract this during the burst and write it
>>>> into the mbuf again.
>>>  From what I've understand, at least it does not work like this for
>>> mellanox NICs: timestamp is a metadata attached to a rx packet. But
>>> maybe they (and other NIC vendors interrested in the feature) can
>>> confirm or not.
>> Olivier is right, this timestamp information is returned by the hardware
>> as the other fields describing the Rx packet (length, RSS hash, checksum
>> ...).  The PMD only copy it into the Mbuf.
>>
> Indeed, for Mellanox the timestamp is stored in the CQ entry.
> Solarflares write it relative to the packet header.

Confirmed. We have pseudo-header just before the packet itself and 
timestamp is put to pseudo-header by the HW.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Chilikin, Andrey]

While doing this fields reshuffling,  any chance to put uint16_t vlan_tci_outer beside uint16_t vlan_tci? It will allow to treat QinQ tags as a single 32-bit tag, if needed, and use it for other tag/labels like MPLS, GRE, NSH which could be 20, 24, 32 bits wide.

/Andrey

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 3:19 PM
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> Based on discussion done in [1], this patchset reorganizes the mbuf.
> 
> The main changes are:
> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>   platforms.
> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
>   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
>   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and
> libraries,
>   and some people highlighted they are using it.
> - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
>   it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
> - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
>   were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
>   so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.
> 
> I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression, but the
> patchset requires more testing.
> 
> [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
> 
> 
> Jerin Jacob (1):
>   mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned
> 
> Olivier Matz (7):
>   mbuf: make segment prefree function public
>   mbuf: make raw free function public
>   mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
>   net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
>   mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
>   mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
>   mbuf: add a timestamp field
> 
>  app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
>  drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
>  drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
>  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
>  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
>  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
>  drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
>  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   3 -
>  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
>  .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 114 ++++++++++++++++-----
>  19 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 98 deletions(-)
> 
> --
> 2.8.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Olivier,

> 
> > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for
> > > mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in
> > > the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> >
> > Not that I am completely against it,
> > but changing nb_segs to 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> > future.
> 
> In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256 segments for
> L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can overflow. It's not
> a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is decremented for each segment.
> On the other hand, if I enable some sanity checks on mbufs, it
> complains because the number of segments is not equal to nb_seg.

I still have a hard time imaging some practical use-case for packet
that spawns over 256 segments.
But might that is just my poor imagination, so ok  if you guys believe
there are some real-world use cases - I wouldn't object here.
Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
>
> Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the timestamp
> usage in a PMD is as following:
>
> rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
> {
>         unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
>         unsigned port = rxq->port;
>
>         for each hw_desc {
>                 m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
>                 m->len = hw_desc->len;
>                 m->port = port;
>                 m->ol_flags =
>                 ...
>                 m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
>         }
>         ...
> }
>
> In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.
>

Timestamps are non-functional data. I believe they don't deserve to be
data normalized.

It would be beneficial to normalize the access of non-functional data.
That would require some kind of extension or feature flags, e.g. like
some uverb structures support extensions. This would allow the NICs
that support timestamps to do the minimal amount of work during burst
and defer data normalization to the time of access. That would also
safe everyone from wasting 64bit in the first cacheline in case
timestamps are not supported or unused.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Morten Brørup]

Hi Olivier,

There has been a lot of debate about the size and location (1st or 2nd cache line) of the mbuf fields.

May I suggest that you add a comment to each field briefly mentioning why it has a specific size (8 or 16 bits) (e.g. by example use case), and optionally also why it deserves to be in the first cache line. (A comment to the mbuf structure can say that fields manipulated by PMDs on ingress generally belong in the 1st cache line.)

It's not necessary for all fields, just the non-obvious ones (the ones discussed here on the mailing list). It will make the information more easily accessible to avoid repeating the same discussions in the future.

E.g. the port field is 16 bits because a hypervisor can serve more than 256 virtual machines. And it is in the 1st cache line because a PMD for a multi-port NIC with a shared ingress queue needs to set it on ingress.

And the refcnt field has the same size as the port field to support L3 multicast and L2 port flooding on all ports.


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Konstantin,

On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 18:42:01 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi guys,
> 
> > > My point is that I still doubt that it belongs into the first
> > > cacheline. It requires accessing other structures for converting
> > > into nanoseconds anyway. Optimally I would like to see this
> > > happening on access instead but if that isn't achievable at least
> > > in a second step.  
> > 
> > Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the
> > timestamp usage in a PMD is as following:
> > 
> > rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
> > {
> > 	unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
> > 	unsigned port = rxq->port;
> > 
> > 	for each hw_desc {
> > 		m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
> > 		m->len = hw_desc->len;
> > 		m->port = port;
> > 		m->ol_flags =
> > 		...
> > 		m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
> > 	}
> > 	...
> > }
> > 
> > In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.  
> 
> So you are saying that:
> - for some HW that DPDK supports (mlx?) timestamp information
> Is available in HW RX descriptor
> - and as soon timestamp field will be available in mbuf, you plan
> to populate it using this HW RXD field.
> Is that so?

Yes, that's what I'm seeing in mellanox's patchset:
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/048810.html

Do you know if Intel has plans to support some sort of timestamp using
this timestamp field?


Thanks,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Andrey,

On Sun, 19 Feb 2017 19:04:58 +0000, "Chilikin, Andrey"
<andrey.chilikin@intel.com> wrote:
> While doing this fields reshuffling,  any chance to put uint16_t
> vlan_tci_outer beside uint16_t vlan_tci? It will allow to treat QinQ
> tags as a single 32-bit tag, if needed, and use it for other
> tag/labels like MPLS, GRE, NSH which could be 20, 24, 32 bits wide.
> 

Merging Vlan is a good idea, and it looks it's feasible, so
I'll add it in next version. About using the same field for other
tags/labels, I'm a bit more reserved as of now, but it's another
debate :)

Thanks,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Jan,

On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 10:27:40 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Olivier Matz
> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the
> > timestamp usage in a PMD is as following:
> >
> > rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
> > {
> >         unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
> >         unsigned port = rxq->port;
> >
> >         for each hw_desc {
> >                 m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
> >                 m->len = hw_desc->len;
> >                 m->port = port;
> >                 m->ol_flags =
> >                 ...
> >                 m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
> >         }
> >         ...
> > }
> >
> > In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.
> >  
> 
> Timestamps are non-functional data. I believe they don't deserve to be
> data normalized.

I don't really see why timestamp is non-functional, compared to rss
hash, flow director id, packet type, seqn, ...

I think the goal of DPDK is to provide a generic/normalized API for
such features (like for offload), so it can be used by an application
whatever the underlying driver.

> 
> It would be beneficial to normalize the access of non-functional data.
> That would require some kind of extension or feature flags, e.g. like
> some uverb structures support extensions. This would allow the NICs
> that support timestamps to do the minimal amount of work during burst
> and defer data normalization to the time of access. That would also
> safe everyone from wasting 64bit in the first cacheline in case
> timestamps are not supported or unused.

I agree that we could start to think about "extensible" mbufs. In few
words, I think we could have:
- only general fields are static
- the application registers room in mbuf structure for all features it
  will use
It would rationalize the room used in mbuf, at the cost of a more
complex/slow access to the data in PMDs and application, since the
offset won't be static.

But to me, this is another work, and a much harder one since it will
impact a lot of PMD code (some are using vector instructions and are
quite hard to change). Moreover, we first have to prove that it would
perform better than we we have now, especially knowing that size of the
cache line will probably change to 128B for many architectures.

Now back on the patch, yes, it's true we are consuming 64bits in the
first cache line. But what are the other options? Having it in the
second cache line would allow free this space for future use. But don't
you think we could optimize current use, and rework the structure if
new needs -- that are more important than timestamp for the majority--
appear?


Thanks,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Morten,

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 10:22:57 +0100, Morten Brørup
<mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> There has been a lot of debate about the size and location (1st or
> 2nd cache line) of the mbuf fields.
> 
> May I suggest that you add a comment to each field briefly mentioning
> why it has a specific size (8 or 16 bits) (e.g. by example use case),
> and optionally also why it deserves to be in the first cache line. (A
> comment to the mbuf structure can say that fields manipulated by PMDs
> on ingress generally belong in the 1st cache line.)
> 
> It's not necessary for all fields, just the non-obvious ones (the
> ones discussed here on the mailing list). It will make the
> information more easily accessible to avoid repeating the same
> discussions in the future.
> 
> E.g. the port field is 16 bits because a hypervisor can serve more
> than 256 virtual machines. And it is in the 1st cache line because a
> PMD for a multi-port NIC with a shared ingress queue needs to set it
> on ingress.
> 
> And the refcnt field has the same size as the port field to support
> L3 multicast and L2 port flooding on all ports.
> 

I understand your point about not rediscussing things several times. I
don't think having a comment for fields is really relevant because it
would add many info that are not useful for the user of the structure,
but I think adding something in the API documentation of the rte_mbuf
structure itself makes sense to me.

I'll add something in the next version of the patch.

Thanks,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Olivier,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 9:54 AM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> Cc: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> On Fri, 17 Feb 2017 18:42:01 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > > > My point is that I still doubt that it belongs into the first
> > > > cacheline. It requires accessing other structures for converting
> > > > into nanoseconds anyway. Optimally I would like to see this
> > > > happening on access instead but if that isn't achievable at least
> > > > in a second step.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the
> > > timestamp usage in a PMD is as following:
> > >
> > > rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
> > > {
> > > 	unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
> > > 	unsigned port = rxq->port;
> > >
> > > 	for each hw_desc {
> > > 		m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
> > > 		m->len = hw_desc->len;
> > > 		m->port = port;
> > > 		m->ol_flags =
> > > 		...
> > > 		m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
> > > 	}
> > > 	...
> > > }
> > >
> > > In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.
> >
> > So you are saying that:
> > - for some HW that DPDK supports (mlx?) timestamp information
> > Is available in HW RX descriptor
> > - and as soon timestamp field will be available in mbuf, you plan
> > to populate it using this HW RXD field.
> > Is that so?
> 
> Yes, that's what I'm seeing in mellanox's patchset:
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/048810.html

Have to admit that I saw that patch before, but missed the fact that
timestamp value is taken from HW RXD.
Ok, then I suppose I don't' have any good reason to object against
putting it in the first cache-line.

> 
> Do you know if Intel has plans to support some sort of timestamp using
> this timestamp field?
> 

As I remember, metrics library uses it, but right now it is filled by SW.
Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Morten Brørup]

Comments at the end.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 5:14 PM
> To: Bruce Richardson
> Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:46:19 +0000, Bruce Richardson
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 02:48:07PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > Hi Konstantin,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > Comments inline.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Konstantin
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The main changes are:
> > > > > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> > > > > non-ia platforms.
> > > > > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
> > > >
> > > > Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > > > How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).
> > >
> > > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
> > > path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st
> > > cache line.
> > >
> > > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib,
> > > not in a PMD rx path.
> > >
> > > > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for
> > > > > mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next
> (located
> > > > > in the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > > > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > > >
> > > > Not that I am completely against it, but changing nb_segs to 16
> > > > bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > > > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> > > > future.
> > >
> > > In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256 segments
> > > for L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can overflow.
> > > It's not a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is decremented for
> > > each segment. On the other hand, if I enable some sanity checks on
> > > mbufs, it complains because the number of segments is not equal to
> > > nb_seg.
> > >
> > > There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed
> > > recently: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/
> > >
> > > Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient, but
> > > the application can maintain another structure to accelerate the
> > > access to the middle/end of the list.
> > >
> > > Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if required
> in
> > > the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > > > >
> > > > > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > > > > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers
> > > > > sets them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance
> > > > > regression, or
> > > >
> > > > I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> > > > As I understand thanks to other change (from above) m->refcnt
> will
> > > > already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> > > > Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.
> > >
> > > Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line once
> > > all PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue some
> > > guidelines to PMD maintainers at the same time the patchset is
> > > pushed. Then we can consider changing it in a future version, in
> > > case we need more room in the 1st mbuf cache line.
> > >
> >
> > If we are changing things, we should really do all that now, rather
> > than storing up future breaks to mbuf. Worst case, we should plan for
> > it immediately after the release where we make these changes. Have
> two
> > releases that break mbuf immediately after each other - and flagged
> as
> > such, but keep it stable thereafter. I don't like having technical
> > debt on mbuf just after we supposedly "fix" it.
> 
> I think there is no need to do this change now. And I don't feel good
> with the idea of having a patchset that updates all the PMDs to remove
> the access to a field because it moved to the 2nd cache line
> (especially thinking about vector PMDs).
> 
> That's why I think the plan could be:
> - push an updated version of this patchset quickly
> - advertise to PMD maintainers "you don't need to set the m->next,
>   m->refcnt, and m->nb_segs in the RX path, please update your drivers"
> - later, if we need more room in the 1st cache line of the mbuf, we
>   can move refcnt and nb_seg, probably without impacting the
>   performance.
> 
> 
> Olivier

I suppose you mean that PMDs don't need to /initialize/ m->next, m->refcnt and m->nb_segs.

Forgive my ignorance, and this is wild speculation, but: Would a PMD not need to set m->next and m->nb_segs if it receives a jumbogram larger than an mbuf packet buffer? And if this is a realistic use case, these fields actually do belong in the 1st cache line. PMD developers please chime in.


And I tend to agree with Bruce about making all these mbuf changes in one go, rather than postponing some of them to later. Especially because the postponement also closes and reopens the whole discussion and decision process! (Not initializing a few fields in a PMD cannot require a lot of work by the PMD developers. Moving the fields to the 2nd cache line will in the worst case degrade the performance of the non-updated PMDs.)

A two step process makes good sense for the developers of DPDK, but both steps should be taken within the same release, so they are transparent to the users of DPDK.


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 03:20:23PM +0100, Morten Brørup wrote:
> Comments at the end.
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 5:14 PM
> > To: Bruce Richardson
> > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > 
> > On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:46:19 +0000, Bruce Richardson
> > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 02:48:07PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > Hi Konstantin,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > > Comments inline.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > > Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Konstantin
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The main changes are:
> > > > > > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> > > > > > non-ia platforms.
> > > > > > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
> > > > >
> > > > > Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > > > > How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).
> > > >
> > > > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the Rx
> > > > path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the 1st
> > > > cache line.
> > > >
> > > > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a lib,
> > > > not in a PMD rx path.
> > > >
> > > > > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for
> > > > > > mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next
> > (located
> > > > > > in the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > > > > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > > > >
> > > > > Not that I am completely against it, but changing nb_segs to 16
> > > > > bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > > > > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful in
> > > > > future.
> > > >
> > > > In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256 segments
> > > > for L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can overflow.
> > > > It's not a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is decremented for
> > > > each segment. On the other hand, if I enable some sanity checks on
> > > > mbufs, it complains because the number of segments is not equal to
> > > > nb_seg.
> > > >
> > > > There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed
> > > > recently: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/
> > > >
> > > > Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient, but
> > > > the application can maintain another structure to accelerate the
> > > > access to the middle/end of the list.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if required
> > in
> > > > the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > > > > > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers
> > > > > > sets them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance
> > > > > > regression, or
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> > > > > As I understand thanks to other change (from above) m->refcnt
> > will
> > > > > already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> > > > > Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line once
> > > > all PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue some
> > > > guidelines to PMD maintainers at the same time the patchset is
> > > > pushed. Then we can consider changing it in a future version, in
> > > > case we need more room in the 1st mbuf cache line.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If we are changing things, we should really do all that now, rather
> > > than storing up future breaks to mbuf. Worst case, we should plan for
> > > it immediately after the release where we make these changes. Have
> > two
> > > releases that break mbuf immediately after each other - and flagged
> > as
> > > such, but keep it stable thereafter. I don't like having technical
> > > debt on mbuf just after we supposedly "fix" it.
> > 
> > I think there is no need to do this change now. And I don't feel good
> > with the idea of having a patchset that updates all the PMDs to remove
> > the access to a field because it moved to the 2nd cache line
> > (especially thinking about vector PMDs).
> > 
> > That's why I think the plan could be:
> > - push an updated version of this patchset quickly
> > - advertise to PMD maintainers "you don't need to set the m->next,
> >   m->refcnt, and m->nb_segs in the RX path, please update your drivers"
> > - later, if we need more room in the 1st cache line of the mbuf, we
> >   can move refcnt and nb_seg, probably without impacting the
> >   performance.
> > 
> > 
> > Olivier
> 
> I suppose you mean that PMDs don't need to /initialize/ m->next, m->refcnt and m->nb_segs.
> 
> Forgive my ignorance, and this is wild speculation, but: Would a PMD not need to set m->next and m->nb_segs if it receives a jumbogram larger than an mbuf packet buffer? And if this is a realistic use case, these fields actually do belong in the 1st cache line. PMD developers please chime in.

Yes, it would. However, this is not really fast-path processing. If we
assume a 2GHz CPU, for 64-byte packets, a core has 34 cycles to process
each packet to achieve 40G line rate. For a packet of size 2k - the
normal size it would need to hit to overflow a buffer, unless you are
using small buffers - the core has 827 cycles per packet. Therefore, in
the latter case, with big packets, the core can afford the hit of
accessing the second cacheline.

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Morten,

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 15:20:23 +0100, Morten Brørup
<mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> Comments at the end.
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 5:14 PM
> > To: Bruce Richardson
> > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > 
> > On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:46:19 +0000, Bruce Richardson
> > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 02:48:07PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > Hi Konstantin,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > > Comments inline.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > > Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Konstantin
> > > > >  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The main changes are:
> > > > > > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> > > > > > non-ia platforms.
> > > > > > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line  
> > > > >
> > > > > Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > > > > How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).  
> > > >
> > > > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the
> > > > Rx path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the
> > > > 1st cache line.
> > > >
> > > > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a
> > > > lib, not in a PMD rx path.
> > > >  
> > > > > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized
> > > > > > for mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting
> > > > > > m->next  
> > (located  
> > > > > > in the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment
> > > > > > packets.
> > > > > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits  
> > > > >
> > > > > Not that I am completely against it, but changing nb_segs to
> > > > > 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > > > > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful
> > > > > in future.  
> > > >
> > > > In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256
> > > > segments for L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can
> > > > overflow. It's not a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is
> > > > decremented for each segment. On the other hand, if I enable
> > > > some sanity checks on mbufs, it complains because the number of
> > > > segments is not equal to nb_seg.
> > > >
> > > > There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed
> > > > recently: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/
> > > >
> > > > Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient,
> > > > but the application can maintain another structure to
> > > > accelerate the access to the middle/end of the list.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if
> > > > required  
> > in  
> > > > the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > > >  
> > > > > > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > > > > > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many
> > > > > > drivers sets them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a
> > > > > > performance regression, or  
> > > > >
> > > > > I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> > > > > As I understand thanks to other change (from above)
> > > > > m->refcnt  
> > will  
> > > > > already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> > > > > Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.  
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line
> > > > once all PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue
> > > > some guidelines to PMD maintainers at the same time the
> > > > patchset is pushed. Then we can consider changing it in a
> > > > future version, in case we need more room in the 1st mbuf cache
> > > > line. 
> > >
> > > If we are changing things, we should really do all that now,
> > > rather than storing up future breaks to mbuf. Worst case, we
> > > should plan for it immediately after the release where we make
> > > these changes. Have  
> > two  
> > > releases that break mbuf immediately after each other - and
> > > flagged  
> > as  
> > > such, but keep it stable thereafter. I don't like having technical
> > > debt on mbuf just after we supposedly "fix" it.  
> > 
> > I think there is no need to do this change now. And I don't feel
> > good with the idea of having a patchset that updates all the PMDs
> > to remove the access to a field because it moved to the 2nd cache
> > line (especially thinking about vector PMDs).
> > 
> > That's why I think the plan could be:
> > - push an updated version of this patchset quickly
> > - advertise to PMD maintainers "you don't need to set the m->next,
> >   m->refcnt, and m->nb_segs in the RX path, please update your
> > drivers"
> > - later, if we need more room in the 1st cache line of the mbuf, we
> >   can move refcnt and nb_seg, probably without impacting the
> >   performance.
> > 
> > 
> > Olivier  
> 
> I suppose you mean that PMDs don't need to /initialize/ m->next,
> m->refcnt and m->nb_segs.
> 
> Forgive my ignorance, and this is wild speculation, but: Would a PMD
> not need to set m->next and m->nb_segs if it receives a jumbogram
> larger than an mbuf packet buffer? And if this is a realistic use
> case, these fields actually do belong in the 1st cache line. PMD
> developers please chime in.

Nothing to add to Bruce's answer :)

> 
> And I tend to agree with Bruce about making all these mbuf changes in
> one go, rather than postponing some of them to later. Especially
> because the postponement also closes and reopens the whole discussion
> and decision process! (Not initializing a few fields in a PMD cannot
> require a lot of work by the PMD developers. Moving the fields to the
> 2nd cache line will in the worst case degrade the performance of the
> non-updated PMDs.)
> 
> A two step process makes good sense for the developers of DPDK, but
> both steps should be taken within the same release, so they are
> transparent to the users of DPDK.

I don't think this is doable, knowing the submission dead line is in
less than 2 weeks. On my side, honestly, I don't want to dive in the
code of into all PMDs. I feel this would be more risky than letting
the PMD maintainers update their own PMD code.

Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 04:04:40PM +0100, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> Hi Morten,
> 
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 15:20:23 +0100, Morten Brørup
> <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > Comments at the end.
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 5:14 PM
> > > To: Bruce Richardson
> > > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > 
> > > On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:46:19 +0000, Bruce Richardson
> > > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 02:48:07PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > Hi Konstantin,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > > > Comments inline.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > Konstantin
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The main changes are:
> > > > > > > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> > > > > > > non-ia platforms.
> > > > > > > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > > > > > How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).  
> > > > >
> > > > > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the
> > > > > Rx path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the
> > > > > 1st cache line.
> > > > >
> > > > > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a
> > > > > lib, not in a PMD rx path.
> > > > >  
> > > > > > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized
> > > > > > > for mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting
> > > > > > > m->next  
> > > (located  
> > > > > > > in the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment
> > > > > > > packets.
> > > > > > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not that I am completely against it, but changing nb_segs to
> > > > > > 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > > > > > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful
> > > > > > in future.  
> > > > >
> > > > > In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256
> > > > > segments for L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can
> > > > > overflow. It's not a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is
> > > > > decremented for each segment. On the other hand, if I enable
> > > > > some sanity checks on mbufs, it complains because the number of
> > > > > segments is not equal to nb_seg.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed
> > > > > recently: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient,
> > > > > but the application can maintain another structure to
> > > > > accelerate the access to the middle/end of the list.
> > > > >
> > > > > Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if
> > > > > required  
> > > in  
> > > > > the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.
> > > > >
> > > > >  
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > > > > > > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many
> > > > > > > drivers sets them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a
> > > > > > > performance regression, or  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> > > > > > As I understand thanks to other change (from above)
> > > > > > m->refcnt  
> > > will  
> > > > > > already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> > > > > > Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.  
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line
> > > > > once all PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue
> > > > > some guidelines to PMD maintainers at the same time the
> > > > > patchset is pushed. Then we can consider changing it in a
> > > > > future version, in case we need more room in the 1st mbuf cache
> > > > > line. 
> > > >
> > > > If we are changing things, we should really do all that now,
> > > > rather than storing up future breaks to mbuf. Worst case, we
> > > > should plan for it immediately after the release where we make
> > > > these changes. Have  
> > > two  
> > > > releases that break mbuf immediately after each other - and
> > > > flagged  
> > > as  
> > > > such, but keep it stable thereafter. I don't like having technical
> > > > debt on mbuf just after we supposedly "fix" it.  
> > > 
> > > I think there is no need to do this change now. And I don't feel
> > > good with the idea of having a patchset that updates all the PMDs
> > > to remove the access to a field because it moved to the 2nd cache
> > > line (especially thinking about vector PMDs).
> > > 
> > > That's why I think the plan could be:
> > > - push an updated version of this patchset quickly
> > > - advertise to PMD maintainers "you don't need to set the m->next,
> > >   m->refcnt, and m->nb_segs in the RX path, please update your
> > > drivers"
> > > - later, if we need more room in the 1st cache line of the mbuf, we
> > >   can move refcnt and nb_seg, probably without impacting the
> > >   performance.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Olivier  
> > 
> > I suppose you mean that PMDs don't need to /initialize/ m->next,
> > m->refcnt and m->nb_segs.
> > 
> > Forgive my ignorance, and this is wild speculation, but: Would a PMD
> > not need to set m->next and m->nb_segs if it receives a jumbogram
> > larger than an mbuf packet buffer? And if this is a realistic use
> > case, these fields actually do belong in the 1st cache line. PMD
> > developers please chime in.
> 
> Nothing to add to Bruce's answer :)
> 
> > 
> > And I tend to agree with Bruce about making all these mbuf changes in
> > one go, rather than postponing some of them to later. Especially
> > because the postponement also closes and reopens the whole discussion
> > and decision process! (Not initializing a few fields in a PMD cannot
> > require a lot of work by the PMD developers. Moving the fields to the
> > 2nd cache line will in the worst case degrade the performance of the
> > non-updated PMDs.)
> > 
> > A two step process makes good sense for the developers of DPDK, but
> > both steps should be taken within the same release, so they are
> > transparent to the users of DPDK.
> 
> I don't think this is doable, knowing the submission dead line is in
> less than 2 weeks. On my side, honestly, I don't want to dive in the
> code of into all PMDs. I feel this would be more risky than letting
> the PMD maintainers update their own PMD code.
> 
I, sadly, have to agree here. I think undertaking rework of all PMDs is
a huge job, that probably needs to be shared among the PMD authors.

Regards,
/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Morten Brørup]

Comments inline.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier MATZ [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 4:05 PM
> To: Morten Brørup
> Cc: Olivier Matz; Bruce Richardson; Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> Hi Morten,
> 
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 15:20:23 +0100, Morten Brørup
> <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > Comments at the end.
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 5:14 PM
> > > To: Bruce Richardson
> > > Cc: Ananyev, Konstantin; dev@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > >
> > > On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:46:19 +0000, Bruce Richardson
> > > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 02:48:07PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > Hi Konstantin,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the feedback.
> > > > > Comments inline.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 18:41:27 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > Looks good in general, some comments from me below.
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > Konstantin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The main changes are:
> > > > > > > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some
> > > > > > > non-ia platforms.
> > > > > > > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wonder why it deserves to be in first cache line?
> > > > > > How it differs from seqn below (pure SW stuff right now).
> > > > >
> > > > > In case the timestamp is set from a NIC value, it is set in the
> > > > > Rx path. So that's why I think it deserve to be located in the
> > > > > 1st cache line.
> > > > >
> > > > > As you said, the seqn is a pure sw stuff right: it is set in a
> > > > > lib, not in a PMD rx path.
> > > > >
> > > > > > > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized
> > > > > > > for mbufs in the pool, avoiding the need of setting
> > > > > > > m->next
> > > (located
> > > > > > > in the 2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment
> > > > > > > packets.
> > > > > > > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not that I am completely against it, but changing nb_segs to
> > > > > > 16 bits seems like an overkill to me.
> > > > > > I think we can keep and extra 8bits for something more useful
> > > > > > in future.
> > > > >
> > > > > In my case, I use the m->next field to chain more than 256
> > > > > segments for L4 socket buffers. It also updates nb_seg that can
> > > > > overflow. It's not a big issue since at the end, nb_seg is
> > > > > decremented for each segment. On the other hand, if I enable
> > > > > some sanity checks on mbufs, it complains because the number of
> > > > > segments is not equal to nb_seg.
> > > > >
> > > > > There is also another use case with fragmentation as discussed
> > > > > recently: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/19819/
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course, dealing with a long mbuf list is not that efficient,
> > > > > but the application can maintain another structure to
> accelerate
> > > > > the access to the middle/end of the list.
> > > > >
> > > > > Finally, we have other ideas to get additional 8 bits if
> > > > > required
> > > in
> > > > > the future, so I don't think it's really a problem.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > > > > > > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many
> > > > > > > drivers sets them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a
> > > > > > > performance regression, or
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I wonder can refcnt only be moved into the 2-nd cacheline?
> > > > > > As I understand thanks to other change (from above)
> > > > > > m->refcnt
> > > will
> > > > > > already be initialized, so RX code don't need to touch it.
> > > > > > Though yes, it still would require changes in all PMDs.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, I agree, some fields could be moved in the 2nd cache line
> > > > > once all PMDs stop to write them in RX path. I propose to issue
> > > > > some guidelines to PMD maintainers at the same time the
> patchset
> > > > > is pushed. Then we can consider changing it in a future
> version,
> > > > > in case we need more room in the 1st mbuf cache line.
> > > >
> > > > If we are changing things, we should really do all that now,
> > > > rather than storing up future breaks to mbuf. Worst case, we
> > > > should plan for it immediately after the release where we make
> > > > these changes. Have
> > > two
> > > > releases that break mbuf immediately after each other - and
> > > > flagged
> > > as
> > > > such, but keep it stable thereafter. I don't like having
> technical
> > > > debt on mbuf just after we supposedly "fix" it.
> > >
> > > I think there is no need to do this change now. And I don't feel
> > > good with the idea of having a patchset that updates all the PMDs
> to
> > > remove the access to a field because it moved to the 2nd cache line
> > > (especially thinking about vector PMDs).
> > >
> > > That's why I think the plan could be:
> > > - push an updated version of this patchset quickly
> > > - advertise to PMD maintainers "you don't need to set the m->next,
> > >   m->refcnt, and m->nb_segs in the RX path, please update your
> > > drivers"
> > > - later, if we need more room in the 1st cache line of the mbuf, we
> > >   can move refcnt and nb_seg, probably without impacting the
> > >   performance.
> > >
> > >
> > > Olivier
> >
> > I suppose you mean that PMDs don't need to /initialize/ m->next,
> > m->refcnt and m->nb_segs.
> >
> > Forgive my ignorance, and this is wild speculation, but: Would a PMD
> > not need to set m->next and m->nb_segs if it receives a jumbogram
> > larger than an mbuf packet buffer? And if this is a realistic use
> > case, these fields actually do belong in the 1st cache line. PMD
> > developers please chime in.
> 
> Nothing to add to Bruce's answer :)

ACK that!

> 
> >
> > And I tend to agree with Bruce about making all these mbuf changes in
> > one go, rather than postponing some of them to later. Especially
> > because the postponement also closes and reopens the whole discussion
> > and decision process! (Not initializing a few fields in a PMD cannot
> > require a lot of work by the PMD developers. Moving the fields to the
> > 2nd cache line will in the worst case degrade the performance of the
> > non-updated PMDs.)
> >
> > A two step process makes good sense for the developers of DPDK, but
> > both steps should be taken within the same release, so they are
> > transparent to the users of DPDK.
> 
> I don't think this is doable, knowing the submission dead line is in
> less than 2 weeks. On my side, honestly, I don't want to dive in the
> code of into all PMDs. I feel this would be more risky than letting the
> PMD maintainers update their own PMD code.
> 
> Olivier

I was assuming that the work of updating the PMD code according to the new mbuf code would be left to the PMD developers. I.e. you take the first step (of updating the mbuf completely), and the PMD developers/maintainers take the second step.

Although I am not doing any of the actual work here, it seems like a relatively small task for each PMD maintainer to update his PMD accordingly, so perhaps you should ask them directly about the deadline issue. From a project release perspective, completing the mbuf structure reorganization in one release seems better than postponing some of the intended modifications for later.

Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
> On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 10:27:40 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Olivier Matz
>> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the
>> > timestamp usage in a PMD is as following:
>> >
>> > rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
>> > {
>> >         unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
>> >         unsigned port = rxq->port;
>> >
>> >         for each hw_desc {
>> >                 m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
>> >                 m->len = hw_desc->len;
>> >                 m->port = port;
>> >                 m->ol_flags =
>> >                 ...
>> >                 m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
>> >         }
>> >         ...
>> > }
>> >
>> > In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.
>> >
>>
>> Timestamps are non-functional data. I believe they don't deserve to be
>> data normalized.
>
> I don't really see why timestamp is non-functional, compared to rss
> hash, flow director id, packet type, seqn, ...
>

One doesn't drop, forward, reorder or decrypt packets based on the
timestamp value.

Common use cases for timestamps are analytics applications or circuit
breakers where you want to ensure that your algos don't act upon stale
data. This is more application layer / slow path work.

> I think the goal of DPDK is to provide a generic/normalized API for
> such features (like for offload), so it can be used by an application
> whatever the underlying driver.
>

I believe there is a difference between dataplane relevant
functionally and non-functional features. If you structurally
normalize the later you will end up making everyone pay for a feature
that is only relevant to a particular group of users. In that case I
would at least expect that the support for timestamps can get selected
at compile time.

>>
>> It would be beneficial to normalize the access of non-functional data.
>> That would require some kind of extension or feature flags, e.g. like
>> some uverb structures support extensions. This would allow the NICs
>> that support timestamps to do the minimal amount of work during burst
>> and defer data normalization to the time of access. That would also
>> safe everyone from wasting 64bit in the first cacheline in case
>> timestamps are not supported or unused.
>
> I agree that we could start to think about "extensible" mbufs. In few
> words, I think we could have:
> - only general fields are static
> - the application registers room in mbuf structure for all features it
>   will use
> It would rationalize the room used in mbuf, at the cost of a more
> complex/slow access to the data in PMDs and application, since the
> offset won't be static.
>

Access through PMD specific function pointers should be relatively
fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that use case well
enough.

> But to me, this is another work, and a much harder one since it will
> impact a lot of PMD code (some are using vector instructions and are
> quite hard to change). Moreover, we first have to prove that it would
> perform better than we we have now, especially knowing that size of the
> cache line will probably change to 128B for many architectures.
>
> Now back on the patch, yes, it's true we are consuming 64bits in the
> first cache line. But what are the other options? Having it in the
> second cache line would allow free this space for future use. But don't
> you think we could optimize current use, and rework the structure if
> new needs -- that are more important than timestamp for the majority--
> appear?

What is you plan for devices that already put the timestamp relative
to the packet data? Do you still want to duplicate and normalize it
into the rte_mbuf field?

What is recommended to do for PMDs that don't support HW timestamps?
Do they still fill this field?

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 05:12:12PM +0100, Jan Blunck wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:54 AM, Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Feb 2017 10:27:40 +0100, Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>
> > wrote:
> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Olivier Matz
> >> <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Sorry, I don't really get your point. My comprehension of the
> >> > timestamp usage in a PMD is as following:
> >> >
> >> > rx_burst(struct rxq *rxq, ...)
> >> > {
> >> >         unsigned long factor = rxq->timestamp_factor;
> >> >         unsigned port = rxq->port;
> >> >
> >> >         for each hw_desc {
> >> >                 m = rte_pktmbuf_alloc(rxq->pool);
> >> >                 m->len = hw_desc->len;
> >> >                 m->port = port;
> >> >                 m->ol_flags =
> >> >                 ...
> >> >                 m->timestamp = hw_desc->timestamp * factor;
> >> >         }
> >> >         ...
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > In that case, I think it deserves to be in the 1st cache line.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Timestamps are non-functional data. I believe they don't deserve to be
> >> data normalized.
> >
> > I don't really see why timestamp is non-functional, compared to rss
> > hash, flow director id, packet type, seqn, ...
> >
> 
> One doesn't drop, forward, reorder or decrypt packets based on the
> timestamp value.
> 
> Common use cases for timestamps are analytics applications or circuit
> breakers where you want to ensure that your algos don't act upon stale
> data. This is more application layer / slow path work.
> 
> > I think the goal of DPDK is to provide a generic/normalized API for
> > such features (like for offload), so it can be used by an application
> > whatever the underlying driver.
> >
> 
> I believe there is a difference between dataplane relevant
> functionally and non-functional features. If you structurally
> normalize the later you will end up making everyone pay for a feature
> that is only relevant to a particular group of users. In that case I
> would at least expect that the support for timestamps can get selected
> at compile time.
> 
> >>
> >> It would be beneficial to normalize the access of non-functional data.
> >> That would require some kind of extension or feature flags, e.g. like
> >> some uverb structures support extensions. This would allow the NICs
> >> that support timestamps to do the minimal amount of work during burst
> >> and defer data normalization to the time of access. That would also
> >> safe everyone from wasting 64bit in the first cacheline in case
> >> timestamps are not supported or unused.
> >
> > I agree that we could start to think about "extensible" mbufs. In few
> > words, I think we could have:
> > - only general fields are static
> > - the application registers room in mbuf structure for all features it
> >   will use
> > It would rationalize the room used in mbuf, at the cost of a more
> > complex/slow access to the data in PMDs and application, since the
> > offset won't be static.
> >
> 
> Access through PMD specific function pointers should be relatively
> fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that use case well
> enough.
>
The cost of doing a function call per packet to access data starts to
add up very, very fast. For the app, once the data is written to the
mbuf, it should be in the L1 cache, giving very fast access to it in a
few cycles. However, if a function call has to be made in order to do
the read, that makes the read of that field many times more expensive.

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Richardson
<bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 05:12:12PM +0100, Jan Blunck wrote:
>>
>> Access through PMD specific function pointers should be relatively
>> fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that use case well
>> enough.
>>
> The cost of doing a function call per packet to access data starts to
> add up very, very fast. For the app, once the data is written to the
> mbuf, it should be in the L1 cache, giving very fast access to it in a
> few cycles. However, if a function call has to be made in order to do
> the read, that makes the read of that field many times more expensive.
>

Exactly. Right now the timestamp normalization is done before writing
to each mbuf. Timestamps are usually read at most once ... if at all.
If you look at the analysis use cases they are read to be written to
persistent storage. My impression is we optimize this on the wrong
end.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Jan,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan Blunck
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:05 PM
> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> Cc: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Richardson
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 05:12:12PM +0100, Jan Blunck wrote:
> >>
> >> Access through PMD specific function pointers should be relatively
> >> fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that use case well
> >> enough.
> >>
> > The cost of doing a function call per packet to access data starts to
> > add up very, very fast. For the app, once the data is written to the
> > mbuf, it should be in the L1 cache, giving very fast access to it in a
> > few cycles. However, if a function call has to be made in order to do
> > the read, that makes the read of that field many times more expensive.
> >
> 
> Exactly. Right now the timestamp normalization is done before writing
> to each mbuf. Timestamps are usually read at most once ... if at all.

Well we don't know for sure right?
Someone can argue that there are plenty of scenarios  when
other fields might also never be used/updated (rss, vlan, etc).

So, are you suggesting to do normalization later?
If so, then what would be the benefit (data still need to be in mbuf)?

> If you look at the analysis use cases they are read to be written to
> persistent storage.

Probably, or some statistic calculations, I guess.
Or might be someone would use it to reorder packets before sending
them out based on the timestamp, or might be something else.
It really hard to predict what use cases would come up (at least for me).

Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 6:26 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Jan,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan Blunck
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:05 PM
>> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
>> Cc: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Richardson
>> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 05:12:12PM +0100, Jan Blunck wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Access through PMD specific function pointers should be relatively
>> >> fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that use case well
>> >> enough.
>> >>
>> > The cost of doing a function call per packet to access data starts to
>> > add up very, very fast. For the app, once the data is written to the
>> > mbuf, it should be in the L1 cache, giving very fast access to it in a
>> > few cycles. However, if a function call has to be made in order to do
>> > the read, that makes the read of that field many times more expensive.
>> >
>>
>> Exactly. Right now the timestamp normalization is done before writing
>> to each mbuf. Timestamps are usually read at most once ... if at all.
>
> Well we don't know for sure right?
> Someone can argue that there are plenty of scenarios  when
> other fields might also never be used/updated (rss, vlan, etc).
>
> So, are you suggesting to do normalization later?
> If so, then what would be the benefit (data still need to be in mbuf)?

Yes, postponing normalization prevents you from doing unnecessary work
upfront. AFAIK not all NICs store timestamp data OOB, e.g. in CQ.

>
>> If you look at the analysis use cases they are read to be written to
>> persistent storage.
>
> Probably, or some statistic calculations, I guess.
> Or might be someone would use it to reorder packets before sending
> them out based on the timestamp, or might be something else.

Those timestamps are generated at arrival in the hardware. So that
order would be relative to the point of reception and in case you want
to resync flows that doesn't help much.

For statistics calculation and the resync use case you also might want
the raw timestamp (not normalized to nsec) and offload the
normalization out of band to reduce overall latency.

> It really hard to predict what use cases would come up (at least for me).
>

Indeed. I also just have the limited view of what I used timestamps
for so far. Who knows what use cases other people come up with in the
future.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan Blunck
> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 7:18 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 6:26 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jan,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan Blunck
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:05 PM
> >> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> >> Cc: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Richardson
> >> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 05:12:12PM +0100, Jan Blunck wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Access through PMD specific function pointers should be relatively
> >> >> fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that use case well
> >> >> enough.
> >> >>
> >> > The cost of doing a function call per packet to access data starts to
> >> > add up very, very fast. For the app, once the data is written to the
> >> > mbuf, it should be in the L1 cache, giving very fast access to it in a
> >> > few cycles. However, if a function call has to be made in order to do
> >> > the read, that makes the read of that field many times more expensive.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Exactly. Right now the timestamp normalization is done before writing
> >> to each mbuf. Timestamps are usually read at most once ... if at all.
> >
> > Well we don't know for sure right?
> > Someone can argue that there are plenty of scenarios  when
> > other fields might also never be used/updated (rss, vlan, etc).
> >
> > So, are you suggesting to do normalization later?
> > If so, then what would be the benefit (data still need to be in mbuf)?
> 
> Yes, postponing normalization prevents you from doing unnecessary work
> upfront. AFAIK not all NICs store timestamp data OOB, e.g. in CQ.

Yes, postponing normalization might help a bit (though I don't think much)
in terms of calculations performed inside PMD.
But we still need 8B inside mbuf to store the timestamp value,
either normalized or raw one.
So to clarify where is the disagreement:
1. timestamp position:
    mbufs 1-st cacheline vs 2-nd cacheline
2. timestamp normalization point
     inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra function in dev_ops?).

So, is it 1) or 2) or both?         
Konstantin



> 
> >
> >> If you look at the analysis use cases they are read to be written to
> >> persistent storage.
> >
> > Probably, or some statistic calculations, I guess.
> > Or might be someone would use it to reorder packets before sending
> > them out based on the timestamp, or might be something else.
> 
> Those timestamps are generated at arrival in the hardware. So that
> order would be relative to the point of reception and in case you want
> to resync flows that doesn't help much.
> 
> For statistics calculation and the resync use case you also might want
> the raw timestamp (not normalized to nsec) and offload the
> normalization out of band to reduce overall latency.
> 
> > It really hard to predict what use cases would come up (at least for me).
> >
> 
> Indeed. I also just have the limited view of what I used timestamps
> for so far. Who knows what use cases other people come up with in the
> future.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Morten Brørup]

Regarding m->timestamp I have previously argued for keeping it NIC specific, and not normalizing it. But I have changed my mind: Normalizing it makes gives the user the ability to transparently swap out a NIC from one vendor with one from another vendor. And with a hardware timestamp from the NIC, the normalization only involves multiplying by a constant factor, as Olivier pointed out previously. So if the resolution is high enough, a normalized value is preferable. 1 ns is roughly 10 bytes at 100 Gbit/s, so I suppose a resolution of 1 ns suffices.

But how about NICs without hardware timestamps...

1. Are their PMDs supposed to set the timestamp or not, and are they supposed to ensure that two packets received by the same port do not carry the same timestamp?

2. And if the CPU clock frequency is not constant, normalizing a software generated timestamp is not just a matter of multiplying the CPU's cycle counter with a constant factor - which could be important if the timestamps are used for some sort of metrics analysis. (I have no knowledge about such use cases, I'm just mentioning potential pitfalls here.)

I guess a lot of NICs aren't configured to provide packet timestamps, so in order to avoid code duplication in a bunch of PMDs, a software timestamping library (or common set of helper functions) might be handy for the PMDs.


Furthermore, the timers on separate NICs will be unsynchronized anyway (regardless if the timestamps are generated by hardware or software), so the timestamps are out of order when considering multiple ingress ports anyway.

Generally, I support the idea of making the somewhat exotic features compile time optional. In that context, it is a question of defining what is common, and what is exotic. But +1 to Jan's suggestion about making it compile time optional for the PMDs to set the m->timestamp, since they are probably not used by typical data plane packet forwarding applications, and they cost a few instruction cycles for each packet. Even though this cost is small, adding a more such exotic features with small individual costs will eventually make their total cost significant.


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi,

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:30:57 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan
> > Blunck Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 7:18 PM
> > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier MATZ
> > <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC
> > 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > 
> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 6:26 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin
> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > Hi Jan,
> > >  
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> > >> Jan Blunck Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:05 PM
> > >> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> > >> Cc: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > >> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re:
> > >> [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Richardson
> > >> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > >> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 05:12:12PM +0100, Jan Blunck wrote:  
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Access through PMD specific function pointers should be
> > >> >> relatively fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that
> > >> >> use case well enough.
> > >> >>  
> > >> > The cost of doing a function call per packet to access data
> > >> > starts to add up very, very fast. For the app, once the data
> > >> > is written to the mbuf, it should be in the L1 cache, giving
> > >> > very fast access to it in a few cycles. However, if a function
> > >> > call has to be made in order to do the read, that makes the
> > >> > read of that field many times more expensive. 
> > >>
> > >> Exactly. Right now the timestamp normalization is done before
> > >> writing to each mbuf. Timestamps are usually read at most
> > >> once ... if at all.  
> > >
> > > Well we don't know for sure right?
> > > Someone can argue that there are plenty of scenarios  when
> > > other fields might also never be used/updated (rss, vlan, etc).
> > >
> > > So, are you suggesting to do normalization later?
> > > If so, then what would be the benefit (data still need to be in
> > > mbuf)?  
> > 
> > Yes, postponing normalization prevents you from doing unnecessary
> > work upfront. AFAIK not all NICs store timestamp data OOB, e.g. in
> > CQ.  
> 
> Yes, postponing normalization might help a bit (though I don't think
> much) in terms of calculations performed inside PMD.
> But we still need 8B inside mbuf to store the timestamp value,
> either normalized or raw one.
> So to clarify where is the disagreement:
> 1. timestamp position:
>     mbufs 1-st cacheline vs 2-nd cacheline


In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we should
put it there. The only argument I see against is "we may find something
more important in the future, and we won't have room for it in the
first cache line". I don't feel we should penalize today's use cases for
hypothetic future use cases.



> 2. timestamp normalization point
>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
> function in dev_ops?).

This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to provide a
generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:

a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the timestamp
   is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have the same
   reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference
   would not be the same.

We may remove a-, and just have:
 - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given path: if
   the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
   the same reference and unit, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib),
   they would not be the same.

In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a library) if
the application wants to work with timestamps from several sources. The
second solution removes the normalization code in the PMD when not
needed, it is probably better.


About having the timestamp in the packet data, I don't think it is
a good solution for a generic API in DPDK. The timestamp is a metadata,
it has to go in the mbuf metadata. The packet data should not be
modified when the timestamp is enabled.

But this would not prevent to have driver-specific features to do that.
In that case, the application will be aware that it is using this
specific driver and that it will receive a timestamp in the packet data.

To summarize, the generic API could be:
- an ethdev API to enable the timestamp in a PMD for received packets
- a mbuf flag "timestamp present"
- a mbuf 64b field to store the timestamp value

Additionally, a driver-specific API can be added for a given PMD.
Example:
- the generic timestamp ethdev is disabled (or not supported)
- a driver-specific feature "put timestamp in packet" is enabled
It would have no additional cost compared to what we have today, since
the timestamp in mbuf is not read/written.



Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 22:51:00 +0100, Morten Brørup
<mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> Regarding m->timestamp I have previously argued for keeping it NIC
> specific, and not normalizing it. But I have changed my mind:
> Normalizing it makes gives the user the ability to transparently swap
> out a NIC from one vendor with one from another vendor. And with a
> hardware timestamp from the NIC, the normalization only involves
> multiplying by a constant factor, as Olivier pointed out previously.
> So if the resolution is high enough, a normalized value is
> preferable. 1 ns is roughly 10 bytes at 100 Gbit/s, so I suppose a
> resolution of 1 ns suffices.
> 
> But how about NICs without hardware timestamps...
> 
> 1. Are their PMDs supposed to set the timestamp or not, and are they
> supposed to ensure that two packets received by the same port do not
> carry the same timestamp?

The timestamp would only be set if the user asks for it through an
ethdev API. For NICs that do not support timestamps, the PMD can either
not support it, or implement it in software. I don't think they should
ensure that two packets do not carry the same timestamp. It depends on
the unit, and on the precision of the measure.


> 2. And if the CPU clock frequency is not constant, normalizing a
> software generated timestamp is not just a matter of multiplying the
> CPU's cycle counter with a constant factor - which could be important
> if the timestamps are used for some sort of metrics analysis. (I have
> no knowledge about such use cases, I'm just mentioning potential
> pitfalls here.)

Since timestamp is a time reference, its unit has to be a constant
clock. On the CPUs I know, even when the internal frequency is not
constant, there is a also time reference with a constant clock (ex:
the tsc on Intel).

> 
> I guess a lot of NICs aren't configured to provide packet timestamps,
> so in order to avoid code duplication in a bunch of PMDs, a software
> timestamping library (or common set of helper functions) might be
> handy for the PMDs.

Yes

> Furthermore, the timers on separate NICs will be unsynchronized
> anyway (regardless if the timestamps are generated by hardware or
> software), so the timestamps are out of order when considering
> multiple ingress ports anyway.
> 
> Generally, I support the idea of making the somewhat exotic features
> compile time optional. In that context, it is a question of defining
> what is common, and what is exotic. But +1 to Jan's suggestion about
> making it compile time optional for the PMDs to set the m->timestamp,
> since they are probably not used by typical data plane packet
> forwarding applications, and they cost a few instruction cycles for
> each packet. Even though this cost is small, adding a more such
> exotic features with small individual costs will eventually make
> their total cost significant.

I don't agree. Having compile-time options is something we should try
to avoid (knowing the DPDK is also a set of libraries provided by
distros). If the timestamp can be enabled/disabled at port
initialization, I think the cost of the feature will be negligible (it
can be one test for a bulk of packets).


Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 03:00:53PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2017 20:30:57 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Jan
> > > Blunck Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 7:18 PM
> > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier MATZ
> > > <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC
> > > 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > 
> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 6:26 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > Hi Jan,
> > > >  
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: jblunck@gmail.com [mailto:jblunck@gmail.com] On Behalf Of
> > > >> Jan Blunck Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 5:05 PM
> > > >> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
> > > >> Cc: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > >> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re:
> > > >> [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > >>
> > > >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 5:38 PM, Bruce Richardson
> > > >> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > >> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 05:12:12PM +0100, Jan Blunck wrote:  
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Access through PMD specific function pointers should be
> > > >> >> relatively fast on access. Modern architecture optimize that
> > > >> >> use case well enough.
> > > >> >>  
> > > >> > The cost of doing a function call per packet to access data
> > > >> > starts to add up very, very fast. For the app, once the data
> > > >> > is written to the mbuf, it should be in the L1 cache, giving
> > > >> > very fast access to it in a few cycles. However, if a function
> > > >> > call has to be made in order to do the read, that makes the
> > > >> > read of that field many times more expensive. 
> > > >>
> > > >> Exactly. Right now the timestamp normalization is done before
> > > >> writing to each mbuf. Timestamps are usually read at most
> > > >> once ... if at all.  
> > > >
> > > > Well we don't know for sure right?
> > > > Someone can argue that there are plenty of scenarios  when
> > > > other fields might also never be used/updated (rss, vlan, etc).
> > > >
> > > > So, are you suggesting to do normalization later?
> > > > If so, then what would be the benefit (data still need to be in
> > > > mbuf)?  
> > > 
> > > Yes, postponing normalization prevents you from doing unnecessary
> > > work upfront. AFAIK not all NICs store timestamp data OOB, e.g. in
> > > CQ.  
> > 
> > Yes, postponing normalization might help a bit (though I don't think
> > much) in terms of calculations performed inside PMD.
> > But we still need 8B inside mbuf to store the timestamp value,
> > either normalized or raw one.
> > So to clarify where is the disagreement:
> > 1. timestamp position:
> >     mbufs 1-st cacheline vs 2-nd cacheline
> 
> 
> In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we should
> put it there. The only argument I see against is "we may find something
> more important in the future, and we won't have room for it in the
> first cache line". I don't feel we should penalize today's use cases for
> hypothetic future use cases.
> 
> 
> 
> > 2. timestamp normalization point
> >      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
> > function in dev_ops?).
> 
> This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to provide a
> generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:
> 
> a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the timestamp
>    is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have the same
>    reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference
>    would not be the same.
> 
> We may remove a-, and just have:
>  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given path: if
>    the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
>    the same reference and unit, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib),
>    they would not be the same.
> 
> In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a library) if
> the application wants to work with timestamps from several sources. The
> second solution removes the normalization code in the PMD when not
> needed, it is probably better.
> 
> 
> About having the timestamp in the packet data, I don't think it is
> a good solution for a generic API in DPDK. The timestamp is a metadata,
> it has to go in the mbuf metadata. The packet data should not be
> modified when the timestamp is enabled.
> 
> But this would not prevent to have driver-specific features to do that.
> In that case, the application will be aware that it is using this
> specific driver and that it will receive a timestamp in the packet data.
> 
> To summarize, the generic API could be:
> - an ethdev API to enable the timestamp in a PMD for received packets
> - a mbuf flag "timestamp present"
> - a mbuf 64b field to store the timestamp value
> 
> Additionally, a driver-specific API can be added for a given PMD.
> Example:
> - the generic timestamp ethdev is disabled (or not supported)
> - a driver-specific feature "put timestamp in packet" is enabled
> It would have no additional cost compared to what we have today, since
> the timestamp in mbuf is not read/written.
> 

All seems reasonable to me.
/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Fri, Feb 24, 2017 at 3:00 PM, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
>
> In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we should
> put it there. The only argument I see against is "we may find something
> more important in the future, and we won't have room for it in the
> first cache line". I don't feel we should penalize today's use cases for
> hypothetic future use cases.
>
>
>
>> 2. timestamp normalization point
>>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
>> function in dev_ops?).
>
> This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to provide a
> generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:
>
> a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the timestamp
>    is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have the same
>    reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference
>    would not be the same.
>
> We may remove a-, and just have:
>  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given path: if
>    the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
>    the same reference and unit, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib),
>    they would not be the same.
>
> In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a library) if
> the application wants to work with timestamps from several sources. The
> second solution removes the normalization code in the PMD when not
> needed, it is probably better.

I agree.

>
> About having the timestamp in the packet data, I don't think it is
> a good solution for a generic API in DPDK. The timestamp is a metadata,
> it has to go in the mbuf metadata. The packet data should not be
> modified when the timestamp is enabled.

Good NICs already do that based on the packet type (e.g. NTP/PTP packets).

>
> But this would not prevent to have driver-specific features to do that.
> In that case, the application will be aware that it is using this
> specific driver and that it will receive a timestamp in the packet data.
>
> To summarize, the generic API could be:
> - an ethdev API to enable the timestamp in a PMD for received packets
> - a mbuf flag "timestamp present"
> - a mbuf 64b field to store the timestamp value
>
> Additionally, a driver-specific API can be added for a given PMD.
> Example:
> - the generic timestamp ethdev is disabled (or not supported)
> - a driver-specific feature "put timestamp in packet" is enabled
> It would have no additional cost compared to what we have today, since
> the timestamp in mbuf is not read/written.
>

Thanks for the writeup. This sounds like a reasonable approach to me.

Do you still want to call the 64bit field "timestamp" or rename it to
something neutral and document that it is used together with the mbuf
flags?

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi everyone,

> >
> > In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we should
> > put it there. The only argument I see against is "we may find something
> > more important in the future, and we won't have room for it in the
> > first cache line". I don't feel we should penalize today's use cases for
> > hypothetic future use cases.
> >
> >
> >
> >> 2. timestamp normalization point
> >>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
> >> function in dev_ops?).
> >
> > This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to provide a
> > generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:
> >
> > a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the timestamp
> >    is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have the same
> >    reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference
> >    would not be the same.
> >
> > We may remove a-, and just have:
> >  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given path: if
> >    the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
> >    the same reference and unit, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib),
> >    they would not be the same.
> >
> > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a library) if
> > the application wants to work with timestamps from several sources. The
> > second solution removes the normalization code in the PMD when not
> > needed, it is probably better.
> 
> I agree.

One question - does that mean that application would need to
keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do the normalization?
Konstantin

> 
> >
> > About having the timestamp in the packet data, I don't think it is
> > a good solution for a generic API in DPDK. The timestamp is a metadata,
> > it has to go in the mbuf metadata. The packet data should not be
> > modified when the timestamp is enabled.
> 
> Good NICs already do that based on the packet type (e.g. NTP/PTP packets).
> 
> >
> > But this would not prevent to have driver-specific features to do that.
> > In that case, the application will be aware that it is using this
> > specific driver and that it will receive a timestamp in the packet data.
> >
> > To summarize, the generic API could be:
> > - an ethdev API to enable the timestamp in a PMD for received packets
> > - a mbuf flag "timestamp present"
> > - a mbuf 64b field to store the timestamp value
> >
> > Additionally, a driver-specific API can be added for a given PMD.
> > Example:
> > - the generic timestamp ethdev is disabled (or not supported)
> > - a driver-specific feature "put timestamp in packet" is enabled
> > It would have no additional cost compared to what we have today, since
> > the timestamp in mbuf is not read/written.
> >
> 
> Thanks for the writeup. This sounds like a reasonable approach to me.
> 
> Do you still want to call the 64bit field "timestamp" or rename it to
> something neutral and document that it is used together with the mbuf
> flags?

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi,

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:05:07 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> > >
> > > In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we
> > > should put it there. The only argument I see against is "we may
> > > find something more important in the future, and we won't have
> > > room for it in the first cache line". I don't feel we should
> > > penalize today's use cases for hypothetic future use cases.
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > >> 2. timestamp normalization point
> > >>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
> > >> function in dev_ops?).  
> > >
> > > This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to
> > > provide a generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:
> > >
> > > a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > > b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the
> > > timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
> > > the same reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the
> > > reference would not be the same.
> > >
> > > We may remove a-, and just have:
> > >  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given
> > > path: if the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this
> > > PMD will have the same reference and unit, but for 2 different
> > > PMDs (or a sw lib), they would not be the same.
> > >
> > > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a
> > > library) if the application wants to work with timestamps from
> > > several sources. The second solution removes the normalization
> > > code in the PMD when not needed, it is probably better.  
> > 
> > I agree.  
> 
> One question - does that mean that application would need to
> keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do the
> normalization? Konstantin

I'd say yes. It does not look very difficult to do, since the mbuf
contains the input port id.


> > > About having the timestamp in the packet data, I don't think it is
> > > a good solution for a generic API in DPDK. The timestamp is a
> > > metadata, it has to go in the mbuf metadata. The packet data
> > > should not be modified when the timestamp is enabled.  
> > 
> > Good NICs already do that based on the packet type (e.g. NTP/PTP
> > packets). 
> > >
> > > But this would not prevent to have driver-specific features to do
> > > that. In that case, the application will be aware that it is
> > > using this specific driver and that it will receive a timestamp
> > > in the packet data.
> > >
> > > To summarize, the generic API could be:
> > > - an ethdev API to enable the timestamp in a PMD for received
> > > packets
> > > - a mbuf flag "timestamp present"
> > > - a mbuf 64b field to store the timestamp value
> > >
> > > Additionally, a driver-specific API can be added for a given PMD.
> > > Example:
> > > - the generic timestamp ethdev is disabled (or not supported)
> > > - a driver-specific feature "put timestamp in packet" is enabled
> > > It would have no additional cost compared to what we have today,
> > > since the timestamp in mbuf is not read/written.
> > >  
> > 
> > Thanks for the writeup. This sounds like a reasonable approach to
> > me.
> > 
> > Do you still want to call the 64bit field "timestamp" or rename it
> > to something neutral and document that it is used together with the
> > mbuf flags?  

I think timestamp is a good name. In the current RFC patchset, we have
this comment:

	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit is nanoseconds */
	uint64_t timestamp;

We could change it to something like:

	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time
	 *  reference are not normalized but are always the same
	 *  for a given port.
	 */
	uint64_t timestamp;


Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Ananyev, Konstantin
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a library) if
>> > the application wants to work with timestamps from several sources. The
>> > second solution removes the normalization code in the PMD when not
>> > needed, it is probably better.
>>
>> I agree.
>
> One question - does that mean that application would need to
> keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do the normalization?

Yes. You usually do this based on mbuf->port.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jan Blunck]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Do you still want to call the 64bit field "timestamp" or rename it
>> > to something neutral and document that it is used together with the
>> > mbuf flags?
>
> I think timestamp is a good name. In the current RFC patchset, we have
> this comment:
>
>         /** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit is nanoseconds */
>         uint64_t timestamp;
>
> We could change it to something like:
>
>         /** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time
>          *  reference are not normalized but are always the same
>          *  for a given port.
>          */
>         uint64_t timestamp;
>

Looks good to me.

Thanks,
Jan

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:05:07 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > > >
> > > > In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we
> > > > should put it there. The only argument I see against is "we may
> > > > find something more important in the future, and we won't have
> > > > room for it in the first cache line". I don't feel we should
> > > > penalize today's use cases for hypothetic future use cases.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> 2. timestamp normalization point
> > > >>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
> > > >> function in dev_ops?).
> > > >
> > > > This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to
> > > > provide a generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:
> > > >
> > > > a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > > > b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the
> > > > timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will have
> > > > the same reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), the
> > > > reference would not be the same.
> > > >
> > > > We may remove a-, and just have:
> > > >  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given
> > > > path: if the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this
> > > > PMD will have the same reference and unit, but for 2 different
> > > > PMDs (or a sw lib), they would not be the same.
> > > >
> > > > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a
> > > > library) if the application wants to work with timestamps from
> > > > several sources. The second solution removes the normalization
> > > > code in the PMD when not needed, it is probably better.
> > >
> > > I agree.
> >
> > One question - does that mean that application would need to
> > keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do the
> > normalization? Konstantin
> 
> I'd say yes. It does not look very difficult to do, since the mbuf
> contains the input port id.
> 

I understand that we can use mbuf->port here, but it means that we'll
introduce new implicit dependency between timestamp and port values.
>From my point that introduces new implications:
1. all PMDs that do set a timestamp would also have to set port value too.
    Probably not a big deal as most of PMDs do set port value anyway right now,
    but it means it would be hard to get rid/change mbuf->port in future.
2. Applications would not allowed to change mbuf->port value before normalization is done
    (from what I heard some apps do update mbuf->port to store routing decisions).  
    BTW, how the app would keep track which mbufs were already normalized, and which were not?
3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be not valid at the point when application
     would decide to do normalization. 

So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems unnecessary overcomplicated.
Original one suggested by Olivier, when normalization is done in PMD at RX look
much cleaner and more manageable. 
Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:29:41 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:05:07 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >  
> > > > >
> > > > > In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we
> > > > > should put it there. The only argument I see against is "we
> > > > > may find something more important in the future, and we won't
> > > > > have room for it in the first cache line". I don't feel we
> > > > > should penalize today's use cases for hypothetic future use
> > > > > cases.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >  
> > > > >> 2. timestamp normalization point
> > > > >>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
> > > > >> function in dev_ops?).  
> > > > >
> > > > > This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to
> > > > > provide a generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:
> > > > >
> > > > > a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > > > > b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the
> > > > > timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will
> > > > > have the same reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw
> > > > > lib), the reference would not be the same.
> > > > >
> > > > > We may remove a-, and just have:
> > > > >  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given
> > > > > path: if the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for
> > > > > this PMD will have the same reference and unit, but for 2
> > > > > different PMDs (or a sw lib), they would not be the same.
> > > > >
> > > > > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a
> > > > > library) if the application wants to work with timestamps from
> > > > > several sources. The second solution removes the normalization
> > > > > code in the PMD when not needed, it is probably better.  
> > > >
> > > > I agree.  
> > >
> > > One question - does that mean that application would need to
> > > keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do the
> > > normalization? Konstantin  
> > 
> > I'd say yes. It does not look very difficult to do, since the mbuf
> > contains the input port id.
> >   
>
> I understand that we can use mbuf->port here, but it means that we'll
> introduce new implicit dependency between timestamp and port values.
> From my point that introduces new implications:
> 1. all PMDs that do set a timestamp would also have to set port value too.
>     Probably not a big deal as most of PMDs do set port value anyway right now,
>     but it means it would be hard to get rid/change mbuf->port in future.

Currently, all PMDs must set m->port.
If in the future we remove m->port, the applications that use it will need
to store the value in a mbuf metadata, or pass it as arguments through function
calls.


> 2. Applications would not allowed to change mbuf->port value before normalization is done
>     (from what I heard some apps do update mbuf->port to store routing decisions).  
>     BTW, how the app would keep track which mbufs were already normalized, and which were not?

I don't think it should be allowed to change m->port value. Applications that
are doing this are responsible of what they change.


> 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be not valid at the point when application
>      would decide to do normalization. 
>
> So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems unnecessary overcomplicated.
> Original one suggested by Olivier, when normalization is done in PMD at RX look
> much cleaner and more manageable. 

Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and data plane,
and not only for this use case. In the first solution, the normalization is
partial: unit is nanosecond, but the time reference is different.

So, after the discussion, I'm more convinced by the second solution.


Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> 
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:29:41 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:05:07 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache line, we
> > > > > > should put it there. The only argument I see against is "we
> > > > > > may find something more important in the future, and we won't
> > > > > > have room for it in the first cache line". I don't feel we
> > > > > > should penalize today's use cases for hypothetic future use
> > > > > > cases.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> 2. timestamp normalization point
> > > > > >>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it (extra
> > > > > >> function in dev_ops?).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries to
> > > > > > provide a generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > > > > > b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if the
> > > > > > timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this PMD will
> > > > > > have the same reference, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw
> > > > > > lib), the reference would not be the same.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We may remove a-, and just have:
> > > > > >  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a given
> > > > > > path: if the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for
> > > > > > this PMD will have the same reference and unit, but for 2
> > > > > > different PMDs (or a sw lib), they would not be the same.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a
> > > > > > library) if the application wants to work with timestamps from
> > > > > > several sources. The second solution removes the normalization
> > > > > > code in the PMD when not needed, it is probably better.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree.
> > > >
> > > > One question - does that mean that application would need to
> > > > keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do the
> > > > normalization? Konstantin
> > >
> > > I'd say yes. It does not look very difficult to do, since the mbuf
> > > contains the input port id.
> > >
> >
> > I understand that we can use mbuf->port here, but it means that we'll
> > introduce new implicit dependency between timestamp and port values.
> > From my point that introduces new implications:
> > 1. all PMDs that do set a timestamp would also have to set port value too.
> >     Probably not a big deal as most of PMDs do set port value anyway right now,
> >     but it means it would be hard to get rid/change mbuf->port in future.
> 
> Currently, all PMDs must set m->port.
> If in the future we remove m->port, the applications that use it will need
> to store the value in a mbuf metadata, or pass it as arguments through function
> calls.
> 
> 
> > 2. Applications would not allowed to change mbuf->port value before normalization is done
> >     (from what I heard some apps do update mbuf->port to store routing decisions).
> >     BTW, how the app would keep track which mbufs were already normalized, and which were not?
> 
> I don't think it should be allowed to change m->port value.

As far as I know it is allowed right now.
PMD RX routine sets mbuf->port, after that application is free to use it
in a way it likes.
What we are introducing here is basically a new dependency between 2
mbuf fields and new restriction. 

Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in use right now.
So each app writer would have to come-up with his own solution.   

> Applications that
> are doing this are responsible of what they change.
> 
> 
> > 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be not valid at the point when application
> >      would decide to do normalization.
> >
> > So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems unnecessary overcomplicated.
> > Original one suggested by Olivier, when normalization is done in PMD at RX look
> > much cleaner and more manageable.
> 
> Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and data plane,
> and not only for this use case. 

Of course it does.
But right now it is possible to do:

eth_rx_burst(port=0, ..., &mbuf, 1);
eth_dev_detach(port=0, ...);
...
/*process previously received mbuf */

With what you are proposing it would be not always possible any more.

>In the first solution, the normalization is
> partial: unit is nanosecond, but the time reference is different.

Not sure I get you here...
Konstantin

> 
> So, after the discussion, I'm more convinced by the second solution.
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:48:20 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
<konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:29:41 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:05:07 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > >  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache
> > > > > > > line, we should put it there. The only argument I see
> > > > > > > against is "we may find something more important in the
> > > > > > > future, and we won't have room for it in the first cache
> > > > > > > line". I don't feel we should penalize today's use cases
> > > > > > > for hypothetic future use cases.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  
> > > > > > >> 2. timestamp normalization point
> > > > > > >>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it
> > > > > > >> (extra function in dev_ops?).  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries
> > > > > > > to provide a generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it
> > > > > > > here:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > > > > > > b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if
> > > > > > > the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this
> > > > > > > PMD will have the same reference, but for 2 different
> > > > > > > PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference would not be the same.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We may remove a-, and just have:
> > > > > > >  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a
> > > > > > > given path: if the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the
> > > > > > > packets for this PMD will have the same reference and
> > > > > > > unit, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), they would
> > > > > > > not be the same.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a
> > > > > > > library) if the application wants to work with timestamps
> > > > > > > from several sources. The second solution removes the
> > > > > > > normalization code in the PMD when not needed, it is
> > > > > > > probably better.  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree.  
> > > > >
> > > > > One question - does that mean that application would need to
> > > > > keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do
> > > > > the normalization? Konstantin  
> > > >
> > > > I'd say yes. It does not look very difficult to do, since the
> > > > mbuf contains the input port id.
> > > >  
> > >
> > > I understand that we can use mbuf->port here, but it means that
> > > we'll introduce new implicit dependency between timestamp and
> > > port values. From my point that introduces new implications:
> > > 1. all PMDs that do set a timestamp would also have to set port
> > > value too. Probably not a big deal as most of PMDs do set port
> > > value anyway right now, but it means it would be hard to get
> > > rid/change mbuf->port in future.  
> > 
> > Currently, all PMDs must set m->port.
> > If in the future we remove m->port, the applications that use it
> > will need to store the value in a mbuf metadata, or pass it as
> > arguments through function calls.
> > 
> >   
> > > 2. Applications would not allowed to change mbuf->port value
> > > before normalization is done (from what I heard some apps do
> > > update mbuf->port to store routing decisions). BTW, how the app
> > > would keep track which mbufs were already normalized, and which
> > > were not?  
> > 
> > I don't think it should be allowed to change m->port value.  
> 
> As far as I know it is allowed right now.
> PMD RX routine sets mbuf->port, after that application is free to use
> it in a way it likes.

The descriptor or m->port is "Input port". If the applications stores
something else than the input port, it is its responsibility if it
breaks something else. Like changing any other field to put something
that does not match the description.


> What we are introducing here is basically a new dependency between 2
> mbuf fields and new restriction. 

On the other hand, there is no strong dependency: the API to do the
normalization can take the port as a parameter.


> 
> Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> solution.   

It depends:
- the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
  normalized value in its private metadata.
- another solution would be to store the normalized value in
  m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the
  timestamp value is normalized.

The problem pointed out by Jan is that doing the timestamp
normalization may take some CPU cycles, even if a small part of packets
requires it.


> 
> > Applications that
> > are doing this are responsible of what they change.
> > 
> >   
> > > 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be
> > > not valid at the point when application would decide to do
> > > normalization.
> > >
> > > So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems
> > > unnecessary overcomplicated. Original one suggested by Olivier,
> > > when normalization is done in PMD at RX look much cleaner and
> > > more manageable.  
> > 
> > Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and
> > data plane, and not only for this use case.   
> 
> Of course it does.
> But right now it is possible to do:
> 
> eth_rx_burst(port=0, ..., &mbuf, 1);
> eth_dev_detach(port=0, ...);
> ...
> /*process previously received mbuf */
> 
> With what you are proposing it would be not always possible any more.

With your example, it does not work even without the timestamp feature,
since the mbuf input port would reference an invalid port. This port
is usually used in the application to do a lookup for an port structure,
so it is expected that the entry is valid. It would be even worst if you
do a detach + attach.

So, I think it is already the responsibility of the application to do
the sync (flush retrieved packets before detaching a port).

> 
> >In the first solution, the normalization is
> > partial: unit is nanosecond, but the time reference is different.  
> 
> Not sure I get you here...

In the first solution I described, each PMD had to convert its unit
into nanosecond. This is easy because we assume the PMD knows the
value of its clock. But to get a fully normalized value, it also has to
use the same time reference, so we would also need to manage an offset
(we need a new API to give this value to the PMD).

I have another fear related to hardware clocks: if clocks are not
synchronized between PMDs, the simple operation "t * ratio - offset"
won't work. That's why I think we could delegate this job in a specific
library that would manage this.

Having a non-normalized timestamp as of today would allow applications
to take advantage of it for many use cases, even without the
normalization library that could come later (and that may probably
be more complex than expected).


Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 3/8] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Bruce,

On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 15:50:49 +0000, Bruce Richardson
<bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 04:19:28PM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > Set the value of m->refcnt to 1, m->nb_segs to 1 and m->next
> > to NULL when the mbuf is stored inside the mempool (unused).
> > This is done in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), before freeing or
> > recycling a mbuf.
> > 
> > Before this patch, the value of m->refcnt was expected to be 0
> > while in pool.
> > 
> > The objectives are:
> > 
> > - to avoid drivers to set m->next to NULL in the early Rx path,
> > since this field is in the second 64B of the mbuf and its access
> > could trigger a cache miss
> > 
> > - rationalize the behavior of raw_alloc/raw_free: one is now the
> >   symmetric of the other, and refcnt is never changed in these
> > functions.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  5 ++---
> >  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  1 +
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c       |  2 ++
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 45
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- 4 files changed, 38
> > insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) 
> <snip>
> > /* compat with older versions */
> >  __rte_deprecated
> > -static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
> > +static inline void
> >  __rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
> >  {
> >  	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
> > @@ -1218,8 +1232,12 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct
> > rte_mbuf *m) m->data_len = 0;
> >  	m->ol_flags = 0;
> >  
> > -	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
> > +	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0) {  
> 
> Minor nit, but in the case that we only have a single reference to the
> mbufs, we are always setting that to zero just to re-increment it to 1
> again.
> 
> > +		md->next = NULL;
> > +		md->nb_segs = 1;
> > +		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(md, 1);
> >  		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
> > +	}
> >  }
> >  
> >  /**  


I'm trying to gather the comments that have been made on this patchset.
About this one, I think it would be more complex to change the code
to avoid to set the refcnt twice:

 - we would need to duplicate code from rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(), which
   I think is not a very good idea, due to the big comment
 - it would make the detach code less readable
 - it's even not sure that it will be more performant: since
   rte_mbuf_refcnt_update() is inline, the compiler is probably able to
   do the simplification by itself.



Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 12:28 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> Cc: Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:48:20 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 10:29:41 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 09:05:07 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin"
> > > > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In my opinion, if we have the room in the first cache
> > > > > > > > line, we should put it there. The only argument I see
> > > > > > > > against is "we may find something more important in the
> > > > > > > > future, and we won't have room for it in the first cache
> > > > > > > > line". I don't feel we should penalize today's use cases
> > > > > > > > for hypothetic future use cases.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> 2. timestamp normalization point
> > > > > > > >>      inside PMD RX vs somewhere later as user needs it
> > > > > > > >> (extra function in dev_ops?).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This point could be changed. My initial proposition tries
> > > > > > > > to provide a generic API for timestamp. Let me remind it
> > > > > > > > here:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > a- the timestamp is in nanosecond
> > > > > > > > b- the reference is always the same for a given path: if
> > > > > > > > the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the packets for this
> > > > > > > > PMD will have the same reference, but for 2 different
> > > > > > > > PMDs (or a sw lib), the reference would not be the same.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We may remove a-, and just have:
> > > > > > > >  - the reference and the unit are always the same for a
> > > > > > > > given path: if the timestamp is set in a PMD, all the
> > > > > > > > packets for this PMD will have the same reference and
> > > > > > > > unit, but for 2 different PMDs (or a sw lib), they would
> > > > > > > > not be the same.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In both cases, we would need a conversion code (maybe in a
> > > > > > > > library) if the application wants to work with timestamps
> > > > > > > > from several sources. The second solution removes the
> > > > > > > > normalization code in the PMD when not needed, it is
> > > > > > > > probably better.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I agree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One question - does that mean that application would need to
> > > > > > keep a track from what PMD each particular packet came to do
> > > > > > the normalization? Konstantin
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd say yes. It does not look very difficult to do, since the
> > > > > mbuf contains the input port id.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I understand that we can use mbuf->port here, but it means that
> > > > we'll introduce new implicit dependency between timestamp and
> > > > port values. From my point that introduces new implications:
> > > > 1. all PMDs that do set a timestamp would also have to set port
> > > > value too. Probably not a big deal as most of PMDs do set port
> > > > value anyway right now, but it means it would be hard to get
> > > > rid/change mbuf->port in future.
> > >
> > > Currently, all PMDs must set m->port.
> > > If in the future we remove m->port, the applications that use it
> > > will need to store the value in a mbuf metadata, or pass it as
> > > arguments through function calls.
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2. Applications would not allowed to change mbuf->port value
> > > > before normalization is done (from what I heard some apps do
> > > > update mbuf->port to store routing decisions). BTW, how the app
> > > > would keep track which mbufs were already normalized, and which
> > > > were not?
> > >
> > > I don't think it should be allowed to change m->port value.
> >
> > As far as I know it is allowed right now.
> > PMD RX routine sets mbuf->port, after that application is free to use
> > it in a way it likes.
> 
> The descriptor or m->port is "Input port". If the applications stores
> something else than the input port, it is its responsibility if it
> breaks something else. Like changing any other field to put something
> that does not match the description.
> 
> 
> > What we are introducing here is basically a new dependency between 2
> > mbuf fields and new restriction.
> 
> On the other hand, there is no strong dependency: the API to do the
> normalization can take the port as a parameter.

Ok, that would be much better - the dependency is still there,
but at least we don't force it.

> 
> 
> >
> > Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> > We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> > and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> > use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> > solution.
> 
> It depends:
> - the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
>   normalized value in its private metadata.
> - another solution would be to store the normalized value in
>   m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the
>   timestamp value is normalized.

My first thought also was about second flag to specify was timestamp
already normalized or not.
Though I still in doubt - is it all really worth it: extra ol_flag, new function in eth_dev API.
My feeling that we trying to overcomplicate things.

> 
> The problem pointed out by Jan is that doing the timestamp
> normalization may take some CPU cycles, even if a small part of packets
> requires it.

I understand that point, but from what I've seen with real example:
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/048810.html
the amount of calculations at RX is pretty small.
I don't think it would affect performance in a noticeable way
(though I don't have any numbers here to prove it).
>From other side, if user doesn't want a timestamp he can always disable
that feature anad save cycles, right? 

BTW, you and Jan both mention that not every packet would need a timestamp.
Instead we need sort of a timestamp for the group of packets?
Is that really the only foreseen usage model?
If so, then why not to have a special function that would extract 'latest' timestamp
from the dev?
Or even have tx_burst_extra() that would return a latest timestamp (extra parameter or so).
Then there is no need to put timestamp into mbuf at all. 

> 
> 
> >
> > > Applications that
> > > are doing this are responsible of what they change.
> > >
> > >
> > > > 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be
> > > > not valid at the point when application would decide to do
> > > > normalization.
> > > >
> > > > So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems
> > > > unnecessary overcomplicated. Original one suggested by Olivier,
> > > > when normalization is done in PMD at RX look much cleaner and
> > > > more manageable.
> > >
> > > Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and
> > > data plane, and not only for this use case.
> >
> > Of course it does.
> > But right now it is possible to do:
> >
> > eth_rx_burst(port=0, ..., &mbuf, 1);
> > eth_dev_detach(port=0, ...);
> > ...
> > /*process previously received mbuf */
> >
> > With what you are proposing it would be not always possible any more.
> 
> With your example, it does not work even without the timestamp feature,
> since the mbuf input port would reference an invalid port.
> This port  is usually used in the application to do a lookup for an port structure,
> so it is expected that the entry is valid. It would be even worse if you
> do a detach + attach.

I am not talking about the mbuf->port value usage.
Right now user can access/interpret  all metadata fields set by PMD RX routines
(vlan, rss hash, ol_flags, ptype, etc.) without need to accessing the device data or
calling device functions.
With that change it wouldn't be the case anymore. 

> 
> So, I think it is already the responsibility of the application to do
> the sync (flush retrieved packets before detaching a port).

The packets are not in RX or TX queue of detaching device any more.
I received a packet, after that I expect to have all its data and metadata inside mbuf.
So I can store mbufs somewhere and process them much later.
Or might be I would like to pass it to the secondary process for logging/analyzing, etc.

> 
> >
> > >In the first solution, the normalization is
> > > partial: unit is nanosecond, but the time reference is different.
> >
> > Not sure I get you here...
> 
> In the first solution I described, each PMD had to convert its unit
> into nanosecond. This is easy because we assume the PMD knows the
> value of its clock. But to get a fully normalized value, it also has to
> use the same time reference, so we would also need to manage an offset
> (we need a new API to give this value to the PMD).

Yes, I suppose we do need an start timestamp and sort of factor() to convert
HW value, something like:

mbuf->timestamp = rxq->start_timestamp  + factor(hw_timestamp);

Right?
Why passing start_timestamp at the configure() phase will be a problem?

> 
> I have another fear related to hardware clocks: if clocks are not
> synchronized between PMDs, the simple operation "t * ratio - offset"
> won't work. That's why I think we could delegate this job in a specific
> library that would manage this.

But then that library would need to account all PMDs inside the system,
and be aware about each HW clock skew, etc.
Again, doesn't' sound like an simple task to me. 

> 
> Having a non-normalized timestamp as of today would allow applications
> to take advantage of it for many use cases, even without the
> normalization library that could come later (and that may probably
> be more complex than expected).
> 
> 
> Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Konstantin,

On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:53:55 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> > > We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> > > and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> > > use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> > > solution.  
> > 
> > It depends:
> > - the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
> >   normalized value in its private metadata.
> > - another solution would be to store the normalized value in
> >   m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the
> >   timestamp value is normalized.  
> 
> My first thought also was about second flag to specify was timestamp
> already normalized or not.
> Though I still in doubt - is it all really worth it: extra ol_flag, new function in eth_dev API.
> My feeling that we trying to overcomplicate things.

I don't see what is so complicated. The idea is just to let the
application do the normalization if it is required.

If the time is normalized in nanosecond in the PMD, we would still
need to normalized the time reference (the 0). And for that we'd need
a call to a synchronization code as well.



> > The problem pointed out by Jan is that doing the timestamp
> > normalization may take some CPU cycles, even if a small part of packets
> > requires it.  
> 
> I understand that point, but from what I've seen with real example:
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/048810.html
> the amount of calculations at RX is pretty small.
> I don't think it would affect performance in a noticeable way
> (though I don't have any numbers here to prove it).

I think we can consider by default that adding code in the data path
impacts performance.


> From other side, if user doesn't want a timestamp he can always disable
> that feature anad save cycles, right? 
> 
> BTW, you and Jan both mention that not every packet would need a timestamp.
> Instead we need sort of a timestamp for the group of packets?

I think that for many applications the timestamp should be as precise
as possible for each packet.


> Is that really the only foreseen usage model?

No, but it could be one.


> If so, then why not to have a special function that would extract 'latest' timestamp
> from the dev?
> Or even have tx_burst_extra() that would return a latest timestamp (extra parameter or so).
> Then there is no need to put timestamp into mbuf at all. 

Doing that will give a poor precision for the timestamp.


> > > > Applications that
> > > > are doing this are responsible of what they change.
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > > > 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be
> > > > > not valid at the point when application would decide to do
> > > > > normalization.
> > > > >
> > > > > So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems
> > > > > unnecessary overcomplicated. Original one suggested by Olivier,
> > > > > when normalization is done in PMD at RX look much cleaner and
> > > > > more manageable.  
> > > >
> > > > Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and
> > > > data plane, and not only for this use case.  
> > >
> > > Of course it does.
> > > But right now it is possible to do:
> > >
> > > eth_rx_burst(port=0, ..., &mbuf, 1);
> > > eth_dev_detach(port=0, ...);
> > > ...
> > > /*process previously received mbuf */
> > >
> > > With what you are proposing it would be not always possible any more.  
> > 
> > With your example, it does not work even without the timestamp feature,
> > since the mbuf input port would reference an invalid port.
> > This port  is usually used in the application to do a lookup for an port structure,
> > so it is expected that the entry is valid. It would be even worse if you
> > do a detach + attach.  
> 
> I am not talking about the mbuf->port value usage.
> Right now user can access/interpret  all metadata fields set by PMD RX routines
> (vlan, rss hash, ol_flags, ptype, etc.) without need to accessing the device data or
> calling device functions.
> With that change it wouldn't be the case anymore. 

That's the same for some other functions. If in my application I want
to call eth_rx_queue_count(m->port), I will have the same problem.

I think we also have something quite similar in examples/ptpclient:

  rte_eth_rx_burst(portid, 0, &m, 1);
  ...
  parse_ptp_frames(portid, m);
  ...
  ptp_data.portid = portid;
  ...
  rte_eth_timesync_read_tx_timestamp(ptp_data->portid, ...)


So, really, I think it's an application issue: when the app deletes
a port, it should ask itself if there are remaining references to
it (m->port).

> > So, I think it is already the responsibility of the application to do
> > the sync (flush retrieved packets before detaching a port).  
> 
> The packets are not in RX or TX queue of detaching device any more.
> I received a packet, after that I expect to have all its data and metadata inside mbuf.
> So I can store mbufs somewhere and process them much later.
> Or might be I would like to pass it to the secondary process for logging/analyzing, etc.

Yes, but that's still an app problem for me.


> > > >In the first solution, the normalization is
> > > > partial: unit is nanosecond, but the time reference is different.  
> > >
> > > Not sure I get you here...  
> > 
> > In the first solution I described, each PMD had to convert its unit
> > into nanosecond. This is easy because we assume the PMD knows the
> > value of its clock. But to get a fully normalized value, it also has to
> > use the same time reference, so we would also need to manage an offset
> > (we need a new API to give this value to the PMD).  
> 
> Yes, I suppose we do need an start timestamp and sort of factor() to convert
> HW value, something like:
> 
> mbuf->timestamp = rxq->start_timestamp  + factor(hw_timestamp);
> 
> Right?
> Why passing start_timestamp at the configure() phase will be a problem?
> 
> > 
> > I have another fear related to hardware clocks: if clocks are not
> > synchronized between PMDs, the simple operation "t * ratio - offset"
> > won't work. That's why I think we could delegate this job in a specific
> > library that would manage this.  
> 
> But then that library would need to account all PMDs inside the system,
> and be aware about each HW clock skew, etc.
> Again, doesn't' sound like an simple task to me. 

Exactly, that's also why I want to let the specialists take care of
it. Having non-normalized timestamps now allow to do the job later
when required, while allowing basic usages as required by metrics
libraries and mlx pmd.



Olivier

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
the mbuf.

The main changes are:
- reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
  platforms.
- add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
  is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
  library may be added to do this job in the future.
- m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
  in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
  2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
- change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
- move seqn in the 2nd cache line

Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
- move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
  them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
  it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
- remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
  and some people highlighted they are using it.
- moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
  it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
- merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
  were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
  so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.

I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression.
Other tests from NIC vendors are welcome.

Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
idea of what could be done.

[1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html

rfc->v1:
- fix reset of mbuf fields in case of indirect mbuf in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
- do not enforce a unit or time reference for m->timestamp
- reorganize fields to make vlan and outer vlan consecutive
- enhance documentation of m->refcnt and m->port to explain why they are 16bits

Jerin Jacob (1):
  mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned

Olivier Matz (8):
  mbuf: make segment prefree function public
  mbuf: make raw free function public
  mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
  drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
  mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
  mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
  mbuf: add a timestamp field
  mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields

 app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
 drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
 drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
 drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
 drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   4 -
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
 .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 123 ++++++++++++++++-----
 19 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)

-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/9] mbuf: make segment prefree function public

[Olivier Matz]

Document the function and make it public, since it is used at several
places in the drivers. The old one is marked as deprecated.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c              |  2 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c            |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c        |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h   |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c            |  2 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h   |  6 +++---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 8 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
index 343dabc..1ee5cbb 100644
--- a/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
@@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ static inline void enic_free_wq_bufs(struct vnic_wq *wq, u16 completed_index)
 	pool = ((struct rte_mbuf *)buf->mb)->pool;
 	for (i = 0; i < nb_to_free; i++) {
 		buf = &wq->bufs[tail_idx];
-		m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg((struct rte_mbuf *)(buf->mb));
+		m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg((struct rte_mbuf *)(buf->mb));
 		buf->mb = NULL;
 
 		if (unlikely(m == NULL)) {
diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
index 144e5e6..c9bb04a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
@@ -434,12 +434,12 @@ static inline void tx_free_bulk_mbuf(struct rte_mbuf **txep, int num)
 	if (unlikely(num == 0))
 		return;
 
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < num; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -455,7 +455,7 @@ static inline void tx_free_bulk_mbuf(struct rte_mbuf **txep, int num)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < num; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 			txep[i] = NULL;
diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
index 27f3e43..825e3c1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
@@ -754,12 +754,12 @@ fm10k_tx_free_bufs(struct fm10k_tx_queue *txq)
 	 * next_dd - (rs_thresh-1)
 	 */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring[txq->next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ fm10k_tx_free_bufs(struct fm10k_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
index 3745558..76031fe 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ i40e_tx_free_bufs(struct i40e_tx_queue *txq)
 	  * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
 	  */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring[txq->tx_next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool)) {
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ i40e_tx_free_bufs(struct i40e_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
index 9502432..b056107 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 
 	for (i = 0; i < txq->tx_rs_thresh; ++i, ++txep) {
 		/* free buffers one at a time */
-		m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep->mbuf);
+		m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep->mbuf);
 		txep->mbuf = NULL;
 
 		if (unlikely(m == NULL))
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
index a3473b9..a83afe5 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 	 * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
 	 */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring_v[txq->tx_next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
index b08f859..f531c54 100644
--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
@@ -98,13 +98,13 @@ virtio_xmit_cleanup(struct virtqueue *vq)
 	desc_idx = (uint16_t)(vq->vq_used_cons_idx &
 		   ((vq->vq_nentries >> 1) - 1));
 	m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < VIRTIO_TX_FREE_NR; i++) {
 			m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ virtio_xmit_cleanup(struct virtqueue *vq)
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < VIRTIO_TX_FREE_NR; i++) {
 			m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index ce57d47..b61c430 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -1213,8 +1213,23 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
 }
 
-static inline struct rte_mbuf* __attribute__((always_inline))
-__rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+/**
+ * Decrease reference counter and unlink a mbuf segment
+ *
+ * This function does the same than a free, except that it does not
+ * return the segment to its pool.
+ * It decreases the reference counter, and if it reaches 0, it is
+ * detached from its parent for an indirect mbuf.
+ *
+ * @param m
+ *   The mbuf to be unlinked
+ * @return
+ *   - (m) if it is the last reference. It can be recycled or freed.
+ *   - (NULL) if the mbuf still has remaining references on it.
+ */
+__attribute__((always_inline))
+static inline struct rte_mbuf *
+rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
@@ -1227,6 +1242,14 @@ __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	return NULL;
 }
 
+/* deprecated, replaced by rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() */
+__rte_deprecated
+static inline struct rte_mbuf *
+__rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+{
+	return rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+}
+
 /**
  * Free a segment of a packet mbuf into its original mempool.
  *
@@ -1239,7 +1262,8 @@ __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
-	if (likely(NULL != (m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m)))) {
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		m->next = NULL;
 		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 	}
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/9] mbuf: make raw free function public

[Olivier Matz]

Rename __rte_mbuf_raw_free() as rte_mbuf_raw_free() and make
it public. The old function is kept for compat but is marked as
deprecated.

The next commit changes the behavior of rte_mbuf_raw_free() to
make it more consistent with rte_mbuf_raw_alloc().

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c     |  2 +-
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  2 +-
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
index b5e6db6..5dd44d7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
@@ -680,7 +680,7 @@ static void ena_rx_queue_release_bufs(struct ena_ring *ring)
 			ring->rx_buffer_info[ring->next_to_clean & ring_mask];
 
 		if (m)
-			__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+			rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 
 		ring->next_to_clean++;
 	}
diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
index 88b0354..41a5bb2 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
@@ -1399,7 +1399,7 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 				assert(pkt != (*rxq->elts)[idx]);
 				rep = NEXT(pkt);
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(pkt, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
 				pkt = rep;
 			}
 			break;
@@ -1410,13 +1410,13 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 					       &rss_hash_res);
 			if (!len) {
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				break;
 			}
 			if (unlikely(len == -1)) {
 				/* RX error, packet is likely too large. */
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				++rxq->stats.idropped;
 				goto skip;
 			}
diff --git a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
index 60d5f81..536b8ea 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
@@ -558,7 +558,7 @@ mpipe_recv_flush_stack(struct mpipe_dev_priv *priv)
 		mbuf->data_len    = 0;
 		mbuf->pkt_len     = 0;
 
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(mbuf);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(mbuf);
 	}
 }
 
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index b61c430..575dc9d 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -790,20 +790,30 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 }
 
 /**
- * @internal Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
- * The use of that function is reserved for RTE internal needs.
- * Please use rte_pktmbuf_free().
+ * Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
+ *
+ * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and that the
+ * reference counter is 0.
  *
  * @param m
  *   The mbuf to be freed.
  */
 static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
-__rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
+	RTE_ASSERT(RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m));
 	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
 	rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 }
 
+/* compat with older versions */
+__rte_deprecated
+static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
+__rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+{
+	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+}
+
 /* Operations on ctrl mbuf */
 
 /**
@@ -1210,7 +1220,7 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m->ol_flags = 0;
 
 	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1265,7 +1275,7 @@ rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		m->next = NULL;
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 	}
 }
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

[Olivier Matz]

Set the value of m->refcnt to 1, m->nb_segs to 1 and m->next
to NULL when the mbuf is stored inside the mempool (unused).
This is done in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), before freeing or
recycling a mbuf.

Before this patch, the value of m->refcnt was expected to be 0
while in pool.

The objectives are:

- to avoid drivers to set m->next to NULL in the early Rx path, since
  this field is in the second 64B of the mbuf and its access could
  trigger a cache miss

- rationalize the behavior of raw_alloc/raw_free: one is now the
  symmetric of the other, and refcnt is never changed in these functions.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  5 ++---
 drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  1 +
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c       |  2 ++
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
index 41a5bb2..fc59544 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
@@ -1398,7 +1398,8 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 			while (pkt != seg) {
 				assert(pkt != (*rxq->elts)[idx]);
 				rep = NEXT(pkt);
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(pkt, 0);
+				NEXT(pkt) = NULL;
+				NB_SEGS(pkt) = 1;
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
 				pkt = rep;
 			}
@@ -1409,13 +1410,11 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 			len = mlx5_rx_poll_len(rxq, cqe, cqe_cnt,
 					       &rss_hash_res);
 			if (!len) {
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				break;
 			}
 			if (unlikely(len == -1)) {
 				/* RX error, packet is likely too large. */
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				++rxq->stats.idropped;
 				goto skip;
diff --git a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
index 536b8ea..0135e2f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c
@@ -557,6 +557,7 @@ mpipe_recv_flush_stack(struct mpipe_dev_priv *priv)
 		mbuf->packet_type = 0;
 		mbuf->data_len    = 0;
 		mbuf->pkt_len     = 0;
+		mbuf->next        = NULL;
 
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(mbuf);
 	}
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
index 72ad91e..0acc810 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
@@ -145,6 +145,8 @@ rte_pktmbuf_init(struct rte_mempool *mp,
 	m->pool = mp;
 	m->nb_segs = 1;
 	m->port = 0xff;
+	rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+	m->next = NULL;
 }
 
 /* helper to create a mbuf pool */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 575dc9d..b4fe786 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -768,6 +768,11 @@ rte_mbuf_sanity_check(const struct rte_mbuf *m, int is_header);
  * initializing all the required fields. See rte_pktmbuf_reset().
  * For standard needs, prefer rte_pktmbuf_alloc().
  *
+ * The caller can expect that the following fields of the mbuf structure
+ * are initialized: buf_addr, buf_physaddr, buf_len, refcnt=1, nb_segs=1,
+ * next=NULL, pool, priv_size. The other fields must be initialized
+ * by the caller.
+ *
  * @param mp
  *   The mempool from which mbuf is allocated.
  * @return
@@ -782,8 +787,9 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 	if (rte_mempool_get(mp, &mb) < 0)
 		return NULL;
 	m = (struct rte_mbuf *)mb;
-	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
-	rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->next == NULL);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->nb_segs == 1);
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
 	return m;
@@ -792,8 +798,13 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 /**
  * Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
  *
- * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and that the
- * reference counter is 0.
+ * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and properly
+ * reinitialized (refcnt=1, next=NULL, nb_segs=1), as done by
+ * rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
+ *
+ * This function should be used with care, when optimization is
+ * required. For standard needs, prefer rte_pktmbuf_free() or
+ * rte_pktmbuf_free_seg().
  *
  * @param m
  *   The mbuf to be freed.
@@ -802,13 +813,16 @@ static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	RTE_ASSERT(RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m));
-	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
+	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->next == NULL);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->nb_segs == 1);
+	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 	rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 }
 
 /* compat with older versions */
 __rte_deprecated
-static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
+static inline void
 __rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
@@ -1219,8 +1233,12 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m->data_len = 0;
 	m->ol_flags = 0;
 
-	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
+	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0) {
+		md->next = NULL;
+		md->nb_segs = 1;
+		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(md, 1);
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
+	}
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1244,9 +1262,13 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
 	if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0)) {
-		/* if this is an indirect mbuf, it is detached. */
 		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
 			rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
+
+		m->next = NULL;
+		m->nb_segs = 1;
+		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+
 		return m;
 	}
 	return NULL;
@@ -1273,10 +1295,8 @@ static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
-	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
-		m->next = NULL;
+	if (likely(m != NULL))
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
-	}
 }
 
 /**
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 4/9] drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx

[Olivier Matz]

Now that the m->next pointer and m->nb_segs is expected to be set (to
NULL and 1 respectively) after a mempool_get(), we can avoid to write them
in the Rx functions of drivers.

Only some drivers are patched, it's not an exhaustive patch. It gives
the idea to do the same in other drivers.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 6 ------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c          | 8 --------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c | 6 ------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c  | 6 ------
 drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c         | 2 --
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c        | 4 ----
 6 files changed, 32 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index b95cc8e..2f861fd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -424,12 +424,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct i40e_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			/* store the resulting 32-bit value */
 			*(int *)split_packet = _mm_cvtsi128_si32(eop_bits);
 			split_packet += RTE_I40E_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		/* C.3 calc available number of desc */
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
index b056107..813c494 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
@@ -1556,8 +1556,6 @@ ixgbe_rx_alloc_bufs(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, bool reset_mbuf)
 		/* populate the static rte mbuf fields */
 		mb = rxep[i].mbuf;
 		if (reset_mbuf) {
-			mb->next = NULL;
-			mb->nb_segs = 1;
 			mb->port = rxq->port_id;
 		}
 
@@ -2165,12 +2163,6 @@ ixgbe_recv_pkts_lro(void *rx_queue, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts, uint16_t nb_pkts,
 			goto next_desc;
 		}
 
-		/*
-		 * This is the last buffer of the received packet - return
-		 * the current cluster to the user.
-		 */
-		rxm->next = NULL;
-
 		/* Initialize the first mbuf of the returned packet */
 		ixgbe_fill_cluster_head_buf(first_seg, &rxd, rxq, staterr);
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index e2715cb..2c04161 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -330,12 +330,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			*(int *)split_packet = ~stat & IXGBE_VPMD_DESC_EOP_MASK;
 
 			split_packet += RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		rte_prefetch_non_temporal(rxdp + RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP);
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index abbf284..65c5da3 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -425,12 +425,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			/* store the resulting 32-bit value */
 			*(int *)split_packet = _mm_cvtsi128_si32(eop_bits);
 			split_packet += RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		/* C.3 calc available number of desc */
diff --git a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
index 57203e2..7e14da0 100644
--- a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
+++ b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
@@ -112,8 +112,6 @@ eth_null_rx(void *q, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, uint16_t nb_bufs)
 			break;
 		bufs[i]->data_len = (uint16_t)packet_size;
 		bufs[i]->pkt_len = packet_size;
-		bufs[i]->nb_segs = 1;
-		bufs[i]->next = NULL;
 		bufs[i]->port = h->internals->port_id;
 	}
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
index cab6e8f..b3e6d80 100644
--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
@@ -772,8 +772,6 @@ virtio_recv_pkts(void *rx_queue, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts, uint16_t nb_pkts)
 		rxm->ol_flags = 0;
 		rxm->vlan_tci = 0;
 
-		rxm->nb_segs = 1;
-		rxm->next = NULL;
 		rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[i] - hdr_size);
 		rxm->data_len = (uint16_t)(len[i] - hdr_size);
 
@@ -900,7 +898,6 @@ virtio_recv_mergeable_pkts(void *rx_queue,
 
 		rxm->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;
 		rxm->nb_segs = seg_num;
-		rxm->next = NULL;
 		rxm->ol_flags = 0;
 		rxm->vlan_tci = 0;
 		rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[0] - hdr_size);
@@ -945,7 +942,6 @@ virtio_recv_mergeable_pkts(void *rx_queue,
 				rxm = rcv_pkts[extra_idx];
 
 				rxm->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM - hdr_size;
-				rxm->next = NULL;
 				rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[extra_idx]);
 				rxm->data_len = (uint16_t)(len[extra_idx]);
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 5/9] mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned

[Olivier Matz]

From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>

To avoid multiple stores on fast path, Ethernet drivers
aggregate the writes to data_off, refcnt, nb_segs and port
to an uint64_t data and write the data in one shot
with uint64_t* at &mbuf->rearm_data address.

Some of the non-IA platforms have store operation overhead
if the store address is not naturally aligned.This patch
fixes the performance issue on those targets.

Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                            | 3 ---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c                          | 5 +----
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c                       | 3 ---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c                        | 3 ---
 lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h | 3 +--
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                                    | 6 +++---
 6 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
index 825e3c1..61a65e9 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
@@ -324,9 +324,6 @@ fm10k_rxq_rearm(struct fm10k_rx_queue *rxq)
 
 		/* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 2f861fd..e17235a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -87,11 +87,8 @@ i40e_rxq_rearm(struct i40e_rx_queue *rxq)
 		mb0 = rxep[0].mbuf;
 		mb1 = rxep[1].mbuf;
 
-		 /* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
+		/* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index 2c04161..bc8924f 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -85,9 +85,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		/*
 		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		vst1_u8((uint8_t *)&mb0->rearm_data, p);
 		paddr = mb0->buf_physaddr + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 65c5da3..62afe31 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -90,9 +90,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		/*
 		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
index 09713b0..f24f79f 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
@@ -116,11 +116,10 @@ struct rte_kni_fifo {
 struct rte_kni_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr __attribute__((__aligned__(RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE)));
 	uint64_t buf_physaddr;
-	char pad0[2];
 	uint16_t data_off;      /**< Start address of data in segment buffer. */
 	char pad1[2];
 	uint8_t nb_segs;        /**< Number of segments. */
-	char pad4[1];
+	char pad4[3];
 	uint64_t ol_flags;      /**< Offload features. */
 	char pad2[4];
 	uint32_t pkt_len;       /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segment data_len. */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index b4fe786..4dc9a20 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -393,10 +393,8 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr;           /**< Virtual address of segment buffer. */
 	phys_addr_t buf_physaddr; /**< Physical address of segment buffer. */
 
-	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
-
 	/* next 6 bytes are initialised on RX descriptor rearm */
-	MARKER8 rearm_data;
+	MARKER64 rearm_data;
 	uint16_t data_off;
 
 	/**
@@ -414,6 +412,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	};
 	uint8_t nb_segs;          /**< Number of segments. */
 	uint8_t port;             /**< Input port. */
+	uint16_t pad;             /**< 2B pad for naturally aligned ol_flags */
 
 	uint64_t ol_flags;        /**< Offload features. */
 
@@ -474,6 +473,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
+	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
 	/* second cache line - fields only used in slow path or on TX */
 	MARKER cacheline1 __rte_cache_min_aligned;
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 6/9] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Olivier Matz]

Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits. It is now possible
to reference a port identifier larger than 256 and have a mbuf chain
larger than 256 segments.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                                      |  4 ++--
 .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h           |  4 ++--
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                                   | 12 +++++++-----
 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
index 88cc842..5eaff9b 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
@@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ pkt_copy_split(const struct rte_mbuf *pkt)
 		rc = mbuf_copy_split(pkt, md, seglen, nb_seg);
 		if (rc < 0)
 			RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1,
-				"mbuf_copy_split for %p(len=%u, nb_seg=%hhu) "
+				"mbuf_copy_split for %p(len=%u, nb_seg=%u) "
 				"into %u segments failed with error code: %d\n",
 				pkt, pkt->pkt_len, pkt->nb_segs, nb_seg, rc);
 
@@ -801,7 +801,7 @@ pkt_burst_checksum_forward(struct fwd_stream *fs)
 			char buf[256];
 
 			printf("-----------------\n");
-			printf("port=%u, mbuf=%p, pkt_len=%u, nb_segs=%hhu:\n",
+			printf("port=%u, mbuf=%p, pkt_len=%u, nb_segs=%u:\n",
 				fs->rx_port, m, m->pkt_len, m->nb_segs);
 			/* dump rx parsed packet info */
 			rte_get_rx_ol_flag_list(rx_ol_flags, buf, sizeof(buf));
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
index f24f79f..2ac879f 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
@@ -118,8 +118,8 @@ struct rte_kni_mbuf {
 	uint64_t buf_physaddr;
 	uint16_t data_off;      /**< Start address of data in segment buffer. */
 	char pad1[2];
-	uint8_t nb_segs;        /**< Number of segments. */
-	char pad4[3];
+	uint16_t nb_segs;       /**< Number of segments. */
+	char pad4[2];
 	uint64_t ol_flags;      /**< Offload features. */
 	char pad2[4];
 	uint32_t pkt_len;       /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segment data_len. */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 4dc9a20..45cd6b9 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -393,12 +393,13 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr;           /**< Virtual address of segment buffer. */
 	phys_addr_t buf_physaddr; /**< Physical address of segment buffer. */
 
-	/* next 6 bytes are initialised on RX descriptor rearm */
+	/* next 8 bytes are initialised on RX descriptor rearm */
 	MARKER64 rearm_data;
 	uint16_t data_off;
 
 	/**
-	 * 16-bit Reference counter.
+	 * Reference counter. Its size should at least equal to the size
+	 * of port field (16 bits), to support zero-copy broadcast.
 	 * It should only be accessed using the following functions:
 	 * rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(), rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(), and
 	 * rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(). The functionality of these functions (atomic,
@@ -410,9 +411,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 		rte_atomic16_t refcnt_atomic; /**< Atomically accessed refcnt */
 		uint16_t refcnt;              /**< Non-atomically accessed refcnt */
 	};
-	uint8_t nb_segs;          /**< Number of segments. */
-	uint8_t port;             /**< Input port. */
-	uint16_t pad;             /**< 2B pad for naturally aligned ol_flags */
+	uint16_t nb_segs;         /**< Number of segments. */
+
+	/** Input port (16 bits to support more than 256 virtual ports). */
+	uint16_t port;
 
 	uint64_t ol_flags;        /**< Offload features. */
 
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 7/9] mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line

[Olivier Matz]

Move this field in the second cache line, since no driver use it
in Rx path. The freed space will be used by a timestamp in next
commit.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 45cd6b9..c75a62a 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -470,8 +470,6 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 		uint32_t usr;	  /**< User defined tags. See rte_distributor_process() */
 	} hash;                   /**< hash information */
 
-	uint32_t seqn; /**< Sequence number. See also rte_reorder_insert() */
-
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
@@ -516,6 +514,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 
 	/** Timesync flags for use with IEEE1588. */
 	uint16_t timesync;
+
+	/** Sequence number. See also rte_reorder_insert(). */
+	uint32_t seqn;
+
 } __rte_cache_aligned;
 
 /**
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 8/9] mbuf: add a timestamp field

[Olivier Matz]

The field itself is not fully described yet, but this commit reserves
the room in the mbuf.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c |  2 ++
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 12 ++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
index 0acc810..f679bce 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
@@ -322,6 +322,7 @@ const char *rte_get_rx_ol_flag_name(uint64_t mask)
 	case PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST: return "PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST";
 	case PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED: return "PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED";
 	case PKT_RX_LRO: return "PKT_RX_LRO";
+	case PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP: return "PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP";
 	default: return NULL;
 	}
 }
@@ -356,6 +357,7 @@ rte_get_rx_ol_flag_list(uint64_t mask, char *buf, size_t buflen)
 		{ PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST, PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST, NULL },
 		{ PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED, PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED, NULL },
 		{ PKT_RX_LRO, PKT_RX_LRO, NULL },
+		{ PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP, PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP, NULL },
 	};
 	const char *name;
 	unsigned int i;
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index c75a62a..fd97bd3 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -177,6 +177,11 @@ extern "C" {
  */
 #define PKT_RX_LRO           (1ULL << 16)
 
+/**
+ * Indicate that the timestamp field in the mbuf is valid.
+ */
+#define PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP     (1ULL << 17)
+
 /* add new RX flags here */
 
 /* add new TX flags here */
@@ -474,6 +479,12 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
 	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
+
+	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time reference
+	 * are not normalized but are always the same for a given port.
+	 */
+	uint64_t timestamp;
+
 	/* second cache line - fields only used in slow path or on TX */
 	MARKER cacheline1 __rte_cache_min_aligned;
 
@@ -1201,6 +1212,7 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_attach(struct rte_mbuf *mi, struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	mi->nb_segs = 1;
 	mi->ol_flags = m->ol_flags | IND_ATTACHED_MBUF;
 	mi->packet_type = m->packet_type;
+	mi->timestamp = m->timestamp;
 
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(mi, 1);
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
-- 
2.8.1

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 9/9] mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields

[Olivier Matz]

Move the vlan_tci field near vlan_tci_outer and buf_len near data_len
for more consistency. It opens the door for get/set of the 2 vlan tci at
the same time.

Suggested-by: Andrey Chilikin <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index fd97bd3..ada98d5 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -449,8 +449,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 
 	uint32_t pkt_len;         /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segments. */
 	uint16_t data_len;        /**< Amount of data in segment buffer. */
-	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
-	uint16_t vlan_tci;
+	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Size of segment buffer. */
 
 	union {
 		uint32_t rss;     /**< RSS hash result if RSS enabled */
@@ -475,11 +474,11 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 		uint32_t usr;	  /**< User defined tags. See rte_distributor_process() */
 	} hash;                   /**< hash information */
 
+	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
+	uint16_t vlan_tci;
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
-	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
-
 	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time reference
 	 * are not normalized but are always the same for a given port.
 	 */
-- 
2.8.1

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Olivier,

> 
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:53:55 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> > > > We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> > > > and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> > > > use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> > > > solution.
> > >
> > > It depends:
> > > - the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
> > >   normalized value in its private metadata.
> > > - another solution would be to store the normalized value in
> > >   m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the
> > >   timestamp value is normalized.
> >
> > My first thought also was about second flag to specify was timestamp
> > already normalized or not.
> > Though I still in doubt - is it all really worth it: extra ol_flag, new function in eth_dev API.
> > My feeling that we trying to overcomplicate things.
> 
> I don't see what is so complicated. The idea is just to let the
> application do the normalization if it is required.

I meant 2 ol_flags and special function just to treat properly one of the mbuf field
seems too much.
Though after second thought might be 2 ol_flags is not a bad idea -
it gives PMD writer a freedom to choose provide a normalized or raw value
on return from rx_burst(). 

> 
> If the time is normalized in nanosecond in the PMD, we would still
> need to normalized the time reference (the 0). And for that we'd need
> a call to a synchronization code as well.
> 
> 
> 
> > > The problem pointed out by Jan is that doing the timestamp
> > > normalization may take some CPU cycles, even if a small part of packets
> > > requires it.
> >
> > I understand that point, but from what I've seen with real example:
> > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/048810.html
> > the amount of calculations at RX is pretty small.
> > I don't think it would affect performance in a noticeable way
> > (though I don't have any numbers here to prove it).
> 
> I think we can consider by default that adding code in the data path
> impacts performance.
> 
> 
> > From other side, if user doesn't want a timestamp he can always disable
> > that feature anad save cycles, right?
> >
> > BTW, you and Jan both mention that not every packet would need a timestamp.
> > Instead we need sort of a timestamp for the group of packets?
> 
> I think that for many applications the timestamp should be as precise
> as possible for each packet.
> 
> 
> > Is that really the only foreseen usage model?
> 
> No, but it could be one.
> 
> 
> > If so, then why not to have a special function that would extract 'latest' timestamp
> > from the dev?
> > Or even have tx_burst_extra() that would return a latest timestamp (extra parameter or so).
> > Then there is no need to put timestamp into mbuf at all.
> 
> Doing that will give a poor precision for the timestamp.
> 
> 
> > > > > Applications that
> > > > > are doing this are responsible of what they change.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be
> > > > > > not valid at the point when application would decide to do
> > > > > > normalization.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems
> > > > > > unnecessary overcomplicated. Original one suggested by Olivier,
> > > > > > when normalization is done in PMD at RX look much cleaner and
> > > > > > more manageable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and
> > > > > data plane, and not only for this use case.
> > > >
> > > > Of course it does.
> > > > But right now it is possible to do:
> > > >
> > > > eth_rx_burst(port=0, ..., &mbuf, 1);
> > > > eth_dev_detach(port=0, ...);
> > > > ...
> > > > /*process previously received mbuf */
> > > >
> > > > With what you are proposing it would be not always possible any more.
> > >
> > > With your example, it does not work even without the timestamp feature,
> > > since the mbuf input port would reference an invalid port.
> > > This port  is usually used in the application to do a lookup for an port structure,
> > > so it is expected that the entry is valid. It would be even worse if you
> > > do a detach + attach.
> >
> > I am not talking about the mbuf->port value usage.
> > Right now user can access/interpret  all metadata fields set by PMD RX routines
> > (vlan, rss hash, ol_flags, ptype, etc.) without need to accessing the device data or
> > calling device functions.
> > With that change it wouldn't be the case anymore.
> 
> That's the same for some other functions. If in my application I want
> to call eth_rx_queue_count(m->port), I will have the same problem.

Yes, but here you are trying to get extra information about device/queue based
on port value stored inside mbuf.
I am talking about information that already stored inside particular mbuf itself.
About m->port itself - as I said before my preference would be to remove it at all
(partly because of that implication - we can't guarantee that m->port information
would be valid though all mbuf lifetime).
But that's probably subject of another discussion. 

> 
> I think we also have something quite similar in examples/ptpclient:
> 
>   rte_eth_rx_burst(portid, 0, &m, 1);
>   ...
>   parse_ptp_frames(portid, m);
>   ...
>   ptp_data.portid = portid;
>   ...
>   rte_eth_timesync_read_tx_timestamp(ptp_data->portid, ...)
> 
> 
> So, really, I think it's an application issue: when the app deletes
> a port, it should ask itself if there are remaining references to
> it (m->port).

Hmm, and where in the example below do you see the reference to the m->port?
As I can see, what that the code above does:
  - it deduces portid value from global variable  - not from m->port
  - saves portid info (not from m->port) inside global variable ptp_data.portid 
 - later inside same function it used that value to call rte_ethdev functions
   (via parse_fup or parse_drsp).

So I am not sure how it relates to the topic we are discussing.

Anyway, to summarize how the proposal looks right now: 

1. m->timestamp value after rx_burst() could be either in raw or normalized format.
2. validity of m->timesamp and the it's format should be determined by 2 ol_flags
(something like: RX_TIMESTAMP, RX_TIMESTAMP_NORM).
3. PMD is free to choose what timestamp value to return (raw/normalized)  
4. PMD can provide an optional routine inside devops:
uint64_t dev_ops->timestamp_normalise(uint64_t timestamps);  
5. If the user wants to use that function it would be his responsibility to map mbuf
to the port it was received from. 

Is that correct?

Thanks
Konstantin


> 
> > > So, I think it is already the responsibility of the application to do
> > > the sync (flush retrieved packets before detaching a port).
> >
> > The packets are not in RX or TX queue of detaching device any more.
> > I received a packet, after that I expect to have all its data and metadata inside mbuf.
> > So I can store mbufs somewhere and process them much later.
> > Or might be I would like to pass it to the secondary process for logging/analyzing, etc.
> 
> Yes, but that's still an app problem for me.
> 
> 
> > > > >In the first solution, the normalization is
> > > > > partial: unit is nanosecond, but the time reference is different.
> > > >
> > > > Not sure I get you here...
> > >
> > > In the first solution I described, each PMD had to convert its unit
> > > into nanosecond. This is easy because we assume the PMD knows the
> > > value of its clock. But to get a fully normalized value, it also has to
> > > use the same time reference, so we would also need to manage an offset
> > > (we need a new API to give this value to the PMD).
> >
> > Yes, I suppose we do need an start timestamp and sort of factor() to convert
> > HW value, something like:
> >
> > mbuf->timestamp = rxq->start_timestamp  + factor(hw_timestamp);
> >
> > Right?
> > Why passing start_timestamp at the configure() phase will be a problem?
> >
> > >
> > > I have another fear related to hardware clocks: if clocks are not
> > > synchronized between PMDs, the simple operation "t * ratio - offset"
> > > won't work. That's why I think we could delegate this job in a specific
> > > library that would manage this.
> >
> > But then that library would need to account all PMDs inside the system,
> > and be aware about each HW clock skew, etc.
> > Again, doesn't' sound like an simple task to me.
> 
> Exactly, that's also why I want to let the specialists take care of
> it. Having non-normalized timestamps now allow to do the job later
> when required, while allowing basic usages as required by metrics
> libraries and mlx pmd.
> 
> 
> 
> Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Konstantin,

On Wed, 8 Mar 2017 11:11:23 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> > 
> > Hi Konstantin,
> > 
> > On Tue, 28 Feb 2017 22:53:55 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> > > > > We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> > > > > and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> > > > > use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> > > > > solution.  
> > > >
> > > > It depends:
> > > > - the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
> > > >   normalized value in its private metadata.
> > > > - another solution would be to store the normalized value in
> > > >   m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the
> > > >   timestamp value is normalized.  
> > >
> > > My first thought also was about second flag to specify was timestamp
> > > already normalized or not.
> > > Though I still in doubt - is it all really worth it: extra ol_flag, new function in eth_dev API.
> > > My feeling that we trying to overcomplicate things.  
> > 
> > I don't see what is so complicated. The idea is just to let the
> > application do the normalization if it is required.  
> 
> I meant 2 ol_flags and special function just to treat properly one of the mbuf field
> seems too much.
> Though after second thought might be 2 ol_flags is not a bad idea -
> it gives PMD writer a freedom to choose provide a normalized or raw value
> on return from rx_burst(). 

I don't see a real advantage now, but I think this is something that
could be added once we have the normalization code.



> > If the time is normalized in nanosecond in the PMD, we would still
> > need to normalized the time reference (the 0). And for that we'd need
> > a call to a synchronization code as well.
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > > > The problem pointed out by Jan is that doing the timestamp
> > > > normalization may take some CPU cycles, even if a small part of packets
> > > > requires it.  
> > >
> > > I understand that point, but from what I've seen with real example:
> > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/048810.html
> > > the amount of calculations at RX is pretty small.
> > > I don't think it would affect performance in a noticeable way
> > > (though I don't have any numbers here to prove it).  
> > 
> > I think we can consider by default that adding code in the data path
> > impacts performance.
> > 
> >   
> > > From other side, if user doesn't want a timestamp he can always disable
> > > that feature anad save cycles, right?
> > >
> > > BTW, you and Jan both mention that not every packet would need a timestamp.
> > > Instead we need sort of a timestamp for the group of packets?  
> > 
> > I think that for many applications the timestamp should be as precise
> > as possible for each packet.
> > 
> >   
> > > Is that really the only foreseen usage model?  
> > 
> > No, but it could be one.
> > 
> >   
> > > If so, then why not to have a special function that would extract 'latest' timestamp
> > > from the dev?
> > > Or even have tx_burst_extra() that would return a latest timestamp (extra parameter or so).
> > > Then there is no need to put timestamp into mbuf at all.  
> > 
> > Doing that will give a poor precision for the timestamp.
> > 
> >   
> > > > > > Applications that
> > > > > > are doing this are responsible of what they change.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > > 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be
> > > > > > > not valid at the point when application would decide to do
> > > > > > > normalization.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems
> > > > > > > unnecessary overcomplicated. Original one suggested by Olivier,
> > > > > > > when normalization is done in PMD at RX look much cleaner and
> > > > > > > more manageable.  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and
> > > > > > data plane, and not only for this use case.  
> > > > >
> > > > > Of course it does.
> > > > > But right now it is possible to do:
> > > > >
> > > > > eth_rx_burst(port=0, ..., &mbuf, 1);
> > > > > eth_dev_detach(port=0, ...);
> > > > > ...
> > > > > /*process previously received mbuf */
> > > > >
> > > > > With what you are proposing it would be not always possible any more.  
> > > >
> > > > With your example, it does not work even without the timestamp feature,
> > > > since the mbuf input port would reference an invalid port.
> > > > This port  is usually used in the application to do a lookup for an port structure,
> > > > so it is expected that the entry is valid. It would be even worse if you
> > > > do a detach + attach.  
> > >
> > > I am not talking about the mbuf->port value usage.
> > > Right now user can access/interpret  all metadata fields set by PMD RX routines
> > > (vlan, rss hash, ol_flags, ptype, etc.) without need to accessing the device data or
> > > calling device functions.
> > > With that change it wouldn't be the case anymore.  
> > 
> > That's the same for some other functions. If in my application I want
> > to call eth_rx_queue_count(m->port), I will have the same problem.  
> 
> Yes, but here you are trying to get extra information about device/queue based
> on port value stored inside mbuf.
> I am talking about information that already stored inside particular mbuf itself.
> About m->port itself - as I said before my preference would be to remove it at all
> (partly because of that implication - we can't guarantee that m->port information
> would be valid though all mbuf lifetime).
> But that's probably subject of another discussion. 
> 
> > 
> > I think we also have something quite similar in examples/ptpclient:
> > 
> >   rte_eth_rx_burst(portid, 0, &m, 1);
> >   ...
> >   parse_ptp_frames(portid, m);
> >   ...
> >   ptp_data.portid = portid;
> >   ...
> >   rte_eth_timesync_read_tx_timestamp(ptp_data->portid, ...)
> > 
> > 
> > So, really, I think it's an application issue: when the app deletes
> > a port, it should ask itself if there are remaining references to
> > it (m->port).  
> 
> Hmm, and where in the example below do you see the reference to the m->port?
> As I can see, what that the code above does:
>   - it deduces portid value from global variable  - not from m->port
>   - saves portid info (not from m->port) inside global variable ptp_data.portid 
>  - later inside same function it used that value to call rte_ethdev functions
>    (via parse_fup or parse_drsp).
> 
> So I am not sure how it relates to the topic we are discussing.

It's similar to what I proposed for the timestamp normalization: for both
functions, you need to call an ethdev function with a port_id as a parameter.
Either you get the port from the mbuf (this is my initial suggestion that you
don't like), either you know it because you retrieved your mbuf with
rte_eth_rx_burst(port_id, ...) (this is what is done in examples/ptpclient).

So, do you still see an issue with having a function to normalize/synchronize
the timestamp that takes a port id as a parameter?


> Anyway, to summarize how the proposal looks right now: 
> 
> 1. m->timestamp value after rx_burst() could be either in raw or normalized format.
> 2. validity of m->timesamp and the it's format should be determined by 2 ol_flags
> (something like: RX_TIMESTAMP, RX_TIMESTAMP_NORM).
> 3. PMD is free to choose what timestamp value to return (raw/normalized)  

I think it needs to be raw now, because we don't have any normalization code
at the moment. Maybe we could add a "normalized" flag if it makes sense in
the future, once we have decided what normalized means, in a context where several
PMDs/libs can have their own timestamp.

But once we have a clear definition of what normalized means + an example of
normalization code, we may have this NORM flag.

> 4. PMD can provide an optional routine inside devops:
> uint64_t dev_ops->timestamp_normalise(uint64_t timestamps);  

I think (but I'm not sure, it's really out of scope of this patchset),
that the timestamp synchronization API will be more complex than that.

My current idea:

- a rte_timestamp library holds the normalization code
- we decide, for instance, that "normalized" means:
  - unit: nanosecond
  - based on system clock
  - reference: 0 = time when rte_timestamp_init() was called
- the PMD provides an API to get its clock
- the lib provides something like:
  uint64_t rte_timestamp_normalize(unsigned int port_id, uint64_t timestamp)


> 5. If the user wants to use that function it would be his responsibility to map mbuf
> to the port it was received from. 

Yes, if the application uses a port_id, it's its responsibility to ensure
that this port exists.



Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Olivier,

> > > > > > Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> > > > > > We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> > > > > > and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> > > > > > use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> > > > > > solution.
> > > > >
> > > > > It depends:
> > > > > - the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
> > > > >   normalized value in its private metadata.
> > > > > - another solution would be to store the normalized value in
> > > > >   m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the
> > > > >   timestamp value is normalized.
> > > >
> > > > My first thought also was about second flag to specify was timestamp
> > > > already normalized or not.
> > > > Though I still in doubt - is it all really worth it: extra ol_flag, new function in eth_dev API.
> > > > My feeling that we trying to overcomplicate things.
> > >
> > > I don't see what is so complicated. The idea is just to let the
> > > application do the normalization if it is required.
> >
> > I meant 2 ol_flags and special function just to treat properly one of the mbuf field
> > seems too much.
> > Though after second thought might be 2 ol_flags is not a bad idea -
> > it gives PMD writer a freedom to choose provide a normalized or raw value
> > on return from rx_burst().
> 
> I don't see a real advantage now, but I think this is something that
> could be added once we have the normalization code.
> 
> 
> 
> > > If the time is normalized in nanosecond in the PMD, we would still
> > > need to normalized the time reference (the 0). And for that we'd need
> > > a call to a synchronization code as well.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > The problem pointed out by Jan is that doing the timestamp
> > > > > normalization may take some CPU cycles, even if a small part of packets
> > > > > requires it.
> > > >
> > > > I understand that point, but from what I've seen with real example:
> > > > http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/048810.html
> > > > the amount of calculations at RX is pretty small.
> > > > I don't think it would affect performance in a noticeable way
> > > > (though I don't have any numbers here to prove it).
> > >
> > > I think we can consider by default that adding code in the data path
> > > impacts performance.
> > >
> > >
> > > > From other side, if user doesn't want a timestamp he can always disable
> > > > that feature anad save cycles, right?
> > > >
> > > > BTW, you and Jan both mention that not every packet would need a timestamp.
> > > > Instead we need sort of a timestamp for the group of packets?
> > >
> > > I think that for many applications the timestamp should be as precise
> > > as possible for each packet.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Is that really the only foreseen usage model?
> > >
> > > No, but it could be one.
> > >
> > >
> > > > If so, then why not to have a special function that would extract 'latest' timestamp
> > > > from the dev?
> > > > Or even have tx_burst_extra() that would return a latest timestamp (extra parameter or so).
> > > > Then there is no need to put timestamp into mbuf at all.
> > >
> > > Doing that will give a poor precision for the timestamp.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > > Applications that
> > > > > > > are doing this are responsible of what they change.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 3. In theory with eth_dev_detach() - mbuf->port value might be
> > > > > > > > not valid at the point when application would decide to do
> > > > > > > > normalization.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So to me all that approach with delayed normalization seems
> > > > > > > > unnecessary overcomplicated. Original one suggested by Olivier,
> > > > > > > > when normalization is done in PMD at RX look much cleaner and
> > > > > > > > more manageable.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Detaching a device requires a synchronization between control and
> > > > > > > data plane, and not only for this use case.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Of course it does.
> > > > > > But right now it is possible to do:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > eth_rx_burst(port=0, ..., &mbuf, 1);
> > > > > > eth_dev_detach(port=0, ...);
> > > > > > ...
> > > > > > /*process previously received mbuf */
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With what you are proposing it would be not always possible any more.
> > > > >
> > > > > With your example, it does not work even without the timestamp feature,
> > > > > since the mbuf input port would reference an invalid port.
> > > > > This port  is usually used in the application to do a lookup for an port structure,
> > > > > so it is expected that the entry is valid. It would be even worse if you
> > > > > do a detach + attach.
> > > >
> > > > I am not talking about the mbuf->port value usage.
> > > > Right now user can access/interpret  all metadata fields set by PMD RX routines
> > > > (vlan, rss hash, ol_flags, ptype, etc.) without need to accessing the device data or
> > > > calling device functions.
> > > > With that change it wouldn't be the case anymore.
> > >
> > > That's the same for some other functions. If in my application I want
> > > to call eth_rx_queue_count(m->port), I will have the same problem.
> >
> > Yes, but here you are trying to get extra information about device/queue based
> > on port value stored inside mbuf.
> > I am talking about information that already stored inside particular mbuf itself.
> > About m->port itself - as I said before my preference would be to remove it at all
> > (partly because of that implication - we can't guarantee that m->port information
> > would be valid though all mbuf lifetime).
> > But that's probably subject of another discussion.
> >
> > >
> > > I think we also have something quite similar in examples/ptpclient:
> > >
> > >   rte_eth_rx_burst(portid, 0, &m, 1);
> > >   ...
> > >   parse_ptp_frames(portid, m);
> > >   ...
> > >   ptp_data.portid = portid;
> > >   ...
> > >   rte_eth_timesync_read_tx_timestamp(ptp_data->portid, ...)
> > >
> > >
> > > So, really, I think it's an application issue: when the app deletes
> > > a port, it should ask itself if there are remaining references to
> > > it (m->port).
> >
> > Hmm, and where in the example below do you see the reference to the m->port?
> > As I can see, what that the code above does:
> >   - it deduces portid value from global variable  - not from m->port
> >   - saves portid info (not from m->port) inside global variable ptp_data.portid
> >  - later inside same function it used that value to call rte_ethdev functions
> >    (via parse_fup or parse_drsp).
> >
> > So I am not sure how it relates to the topic we are discussing.
> 
> It's similar to what I proposed for the timestamp normalization: for both
> functions, you need to call an ethdev function with a port_id as a parameter.
> Either you get the port from the mbuf (this is my initial suggestion that you
> don't like), either you know it because you retrieved your mbuf with
> rte_eth_rx_burst(port_id, ...) (this is what is done in examples/ptpclient).
> 
> So, do you still see an issue with having a function to normalize/synchronize
> the timestamp that takes a port id as a parameter?

If it hasn't rely on mbuf->port value, then probably  not.

> 
> 
> > Anyway, to summarize how the proposal looks right now:
> >
> > 1. m->timestamp value after rx_burst() could be either in raw or normalized format.
> > 2. validity of m->timesamp and the it's format should be determined by 2 ol_flags
> > (something like: RX_TIMESTAMP, RX_TIMESTAMP_NORM).
> > 3. PMD is free to choose what timestamp value to return (raw/normalized)
> 
> I think it needs to be raw now, because we don't have any normalization code
> at the moment. Maybe we could add a "normalized" flag if it makes sense in
> the future, once we have decided what normalized means, in a context where several
> PMDs/libs can have their own timestamp.
> 
> But once we have a clear definition of what normalized means + an example of
> normalization code, we may have this NORM flag.
> 
> > 4. PMD can provide an optional routine inside devops:
> > uint64_t dev_ops->timestamp_normalise(uint64_t timestamps);
> 
> I think (but I'm not sure, it's really out of scope of this patchset),
> that the timestamp synchronization API will be more complex than that.
> 
> My current idea:
> 
> - a rte_timestamp library holds the normalization code
> - we decide, for instance, that "normalized" means:
>   - unit: nanosecond
>   - based on system clock
>   - reference: 0 = time when rte_timestamp_init() was called
> - the PMD provides an API to get its clock
> - the lib provides something like:
>   uint64_t rte_timestamp_normalize(unsigned int port_id, uint64_t timestamp)
> 
> 
> > 5. If the user wants to use that function it would be his responsibility to map mbuf
> > to the port it was received from.
> 
> Yes, if the application uses a port_id, it's its responsibility to ensure
> that this port exists.

Ok, so for 17.05 we'll have:
- raw timestamp value inside mbuf
- ol_flag bit to represenet is mbuf->timestamp value valid or not.
That's it, correct?

Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jerin Jacob]

On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 05:42:12PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> 
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> > > > > > > Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> > > > > > > We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> > > > > > > and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> > > > > > > use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> > > > > > > solution.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It depends:
> > > > > > - the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
> > > > > >   normalized value in its private metadata.
> > > > > > - another solution would be to store the normalized value in
> > > > > >   m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the
> > > uint64_t dev_ops->timestamp_normalise(uint64_t timestamps);
> > 
> > I think (but I'm not sure, it's really out of scope of this patchset),
> > that the timestamp synchronization API will be more complex than that.
> > 
> > My current idea:
> > 
> > - a rte_timestamp library holds the normalization code
> > - we decide, for instance, that "normalized" means:
> >   - unit: nanosecond
> >   - based on system clock
> >   - reference: 0 = time when rte_timestamp_init() was called
> > - the PMD provides an API to get its clock
> > - the lib provides something like:
> >   uint64_t rte_timestamp_normalize(unsigned int port_id, uint64_t timestamp)
> > 
> > 
> > > 5. If the user wants to use that function it would be his responsibility to map mbuf
> > > to the port it was received from.
> > 
> > Yes, if the application uses a port_id, it's its responsibility to ensure
> > that this port exists.
> 
> Ok, so for 17.05 we'll have:
> - raw timestamp value inside mbuf
> - ol_flag bit to represenet is mbuf->timestamp value valid or not.
> That's it, correct?

Hi Olivier,

The ARM alignment fix also will be part of the v17.05. Right?

> 
> Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi Jerin,

On Fri, 24 Mar 2017 14:05:04 +0530, Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 05:42:12PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Olivier,
> >   
> > > > > > > > Another thing that doesn't look very convenient to me here -
> > > > > > > > We can have 2 different values of timestamp (both normalized and not)
> > > > > > > > and there is no clear way for the application to know which one is in
> > > > > > > > use right now. So each app writer would have to come-up with his own
> > > > > > > > solution.  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It depends:
> > > > > > > - the solution you describe is to have the application storing the
> > > > > > >   normalized value in its private metadata.
> > > > > > > - another solution would be to store the normalized value in
> > > > > > >   m->timestamp. In this case, we would need a flag to tell if the  
> > > > uint64_t dev_ops->timestamp_normalise(uint64_t timestamps);  
> > > 
> > > I think (but I'm not sure, it's really out of scope of this patchset),
> > > that the timestamp synchronization API will be more complex than that.
> > > 
> > > My current idea:
> > > 
> > > - a rte_timestamp library holds the normalization code
> > > - we decide, for instance, that "normalized" means:
> > >   - unit: nanosecond
> > >   - based on system clock
> > >   - reference: 0 = time when rte_timestamp_init() was called
> > > - the PMD provides an API to get its clock
> > > - the lib provides something like:
> > >   uint64_t rte_timestamp_normalize(unsigned int port_id, uint64_t timestamp)
> > > 
> > >   
> > > > 5. If the user wants to use that function it would be his responsibility to map mbuf
> > > > to the port it was received from.  
> > > 
> > > Yes, if the application uses a port_id, it's its responsibility to ensure
> > > that this port exists.  
> > 
> > Ok, so for 17.05 we'll have:
> > - raw timestamp value inside mbuf
> > - ol_flag bit to represenet is mbuf->timestamp value valid or not.
> > That's it, correct?  
> 
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> The ARM alignment fix also will be part of the v17.05. Right?

It's in this patchset, planned for v17.05.
From what I see, there is no strong opposition to the patchset, so
it should go in.
(note, the v1 is here: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/059693.html)

If you (and others) have time to test or review, that may help to
integrate it faster.

Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi,

Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
Can it be applied?


Thanks,
Olivier



On Wed,  8 Mar 2017 10:41:52 +0100, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> the mbuf.
> 
> The main changes are:
> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>   platforms.
> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
>   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
>   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
>   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
>   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
>   and some people highlighted they are using it.
> - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
>   it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
> - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
>   were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
>   so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.
> 
> I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression.
> Other tests from NIC vendors are welcome.
> 
> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> idea of what could be done.
> 
> [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
> 
> rfc->v1:
> - fix reset of mbuf fields in case of indirect mbuf in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
> - do not enforce a unit or time reference for m->timestamp
> - reorganize fields to make vlan and outer vlan consecutive
> - enhance documentation of m->refcnt and m->port to explain why they are 16bits
> 
> Jerin Jacob (1):
>   mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned
> 
> Olivier Matz (8):
>   mbuf: make segment prefree function public
>   mbuf: make raw free function public
>   mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
>   drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
>   mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
>   mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
>   mbuf: add a timestamp field
>   mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields
> 
>  app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
>  drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
>  drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
>  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
>  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
>  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
>  drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
>  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   4 -
>  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
>  .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 123 ++++++++++++++++-----
>  19 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)
> 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Morten Brørup]

> Does anyone have any other comment on this series?

Great work!

> Can it be applied?

Yes.


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> Can it be applied?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Olivier
> 

I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.

	/Bruce
> 
> 
> On Wed,  8 Mar 2017 10:41:52 +0100, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> > the mbuf.
> > 
> > The main changes are:
> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >   platforms.
> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
> >   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
> >   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
> >   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
> >   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > 
> > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
> >   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
> >   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> > - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
> >   and some people highlighted they are using it.
> > - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
> >   it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
> > - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
> >   were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
> >   so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.
> > 
> > I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression.
> > Other tests from NIC vendors are welcome.
> > 
> > Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> > by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> > idea of what could be done.
> > 
> > [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
> > 
> > rfc->v1:
> > - fix reset of mbuf fields in case of indirect mbuf in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
> > - do not enforce a unit or time reference for m->timestamp
> > - reorganize fields to make vlan and outer vlan consecutive
> > - enhance documentation of m->refcnt and m->port to explain why they are 16bits
> > 
> > Jerin Jacob (1):
> >   mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned
> > 
> > Olivier Matz (8):
> >   mbuf: make segment prefree function public
> >   mbuf: make raw free function public
> >   mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> >   drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
> >   mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
> >   mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
> >   mbuf: add a timestamp field
> >   mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields
> > 
> >  app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
> >  drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
> >  drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
> >  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
> >  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
> >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
> >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
> >  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
> >  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
> >  drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
> >  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   4 -
> >  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
> >  .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 123 ++++++++++++++++-----
> >  19 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)
> > 
> 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > Can it be applied?
> > 
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Olivier
> > 
> 
> I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> 
> 	/Bruce
> > 
In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
parts may be causing the problem.

Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
impact of this set may be?

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > Can it be applied?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > Olivier
> > >   
> > 
> > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > 
> > 	/Bruce  
> > >   
> In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> parts may be causing the problem.
> 
> Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> impact of this set may be?

I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
current version.


Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Olivier
> > > >   
> > > 
> > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > 
> > > 	/Bruce  
> > > >   
> > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > parts may be causing the problem.
> > 
> > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > impact of this set may be?
> 
> I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> current version.
> 
I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)

Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.

Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
like this.

Regards,
/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Andrew Rybchenko]

On 03/08/2017 12:41 PM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> the mbuf.
>
> The main changes are:
> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>    platforms.
> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
>    is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
>    library may be added to do this job in the future.
> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>    in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>    2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
>
> Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
>    them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
>    it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
>    and some people highlighted they are using it.
> - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
>    it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
> - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
>    were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
>    so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.
>
> I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression.
> Other tests from NIC vendors are welcome.
>
> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> idea of what could be done.
>
> [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
>
> rfc->v1:
> - fix reset of mbuf fields in case of indirect mbuf in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
> - do not enforce a unit or time reference for m->timestamp
> - reorganize fields to make vlan and outer vlan consecutive
> - enhance documentation of m->refcnt and m->port to explain why they are 16bits
>
> Jerin Jacob (1):
>    mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned
>
> Olivier Matz (8):
>    mbuf: make segment prefree function public
>    mbuf: make raw free function public
>    mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
>    drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
>    mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
>    mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
>    mbuf: add a timestamp field
>    mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields
>
>   app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
>   drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
>   drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
>   drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
>   drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
>   drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
>   drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
>   drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
>   drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
>   drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
>   drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
>   drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
>   drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
>   drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
>   drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   4 -
>   drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
>   .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
>   lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
>   lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 123 ++++++++++++++++-----
>   19 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)
>

I see better performance with the patch series applied and next=NULL
assignments removed from net/sfc (waiting for the series applied to submit
corresponding patches). So the series:

Acked-by: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Jerin Jacob]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:41:52AM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> the mbuf.
> 
> The main changes are:
> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>   platforms.
> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
>   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
>   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
>   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
>   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
>   and some people highlighted they are using it.
> - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
>   it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
> - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
>   were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
>   so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.
> 
> I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression.
> Other tests from NIC vendors are welcome.
> 
> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> idea of what could be done.
> 
> [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
> 
> rfc->v1:
> - fix reset of mbuf fields in case of indirect mbuf in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
> - do not enforce a unit or time reference for m->timestamp
> - reorganize fields to make vlan and outer vlan consecutive
> - enhance documentation of m->refcnt and m->port to explain why they are 16bits
> 
> Jerin Jacob (1):
>   mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned
> 
> Olivier Matz (8):
>   mbuf: make segment prefree function public
>   mbuf: make raw free function public
>   mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
>   drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
>   mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
>   mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
>   mbuf: add a timestamp field
>   mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields
> 
>  app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
>  drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
>  drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
>  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
>  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
>  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
>  drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
>  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   4 -
>  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
>  .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 123 ++++++++++++++++-----
>  19 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)

No performance regression on this series on arm64 + thunderx PMD combo.

Tested-by: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>

> 
> -- 
> 2.8.1
> 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richardson, Bruce
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Olivier
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > >
> > > > 	/Bruce
> > > > >
> > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > >
> > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > impact of this set may be?
> >
> > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > current version.
> >
> I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> 
> Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> 
> Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> like this.
> 

Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.
Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
>From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
[dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
cmdline:
./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i

Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:45 PM
> To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > >
> > > > > 	/Bruce
> > > > > >
> > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > >
> > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > impact of this set may be?
> > >
> > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > current version.
> > >
> > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> >
> > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> >
> > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > like this.
> >
> 
> Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.

Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
So it doesn't look like i40e specific.

> Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> 
> cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> cmdline:
> ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> 
> Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:48 PM
> To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier Matz
> <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
> > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:45 PM
> > To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> > nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 	/Bruce
> > > > > > >
> > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > impact of this set may be?
> > > >
> > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > current version.
> > > >
> > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > >
> > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > >
> > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > like this.
> > >
> >
> > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.
> 
> Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> 
> > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> >
> > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > cmdline:
> > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> >

Actually one more question regarding:
[dpdk-dev,9/9] mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index fd97bd3..ada98d5 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -449,8 +449,7 @@  struct rte_mbuf {
 
 	uint32_t pkt_len;         /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segments. */
 	uint16_t data_len;        /**< Amount of data in segment buffer. */
-	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
-	uint16_t vlan_tci;
+	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Size of segment buffer. */
 
 	union {
 		uint32_t rss;     /**< RSS hash result if RSS enabled */
@@ -475,11 +474,11 @@  struct rte_mbuf {
 		uint32_t usr;	  /**< User defined tags. See rte_distributor_process() */
 	} hash;                   /**< hash information */
 
+	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
+	uint16_t vlan_tci;
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
-	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
-
 	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time reference
 	 * are not normalized but are always the same for a given port.
 	 */

How ixgbe and i40e SSE version supposed to work correctly after  that change?
As I remember both of them sets vlan_tci as part of 16B shuffle operation.
Something like that:
pkt_mb4 = _mm_shuffle_epi8(descs[3], shuf_msk);
...
mm_storeu_si128((void *)&rx_pkts[pos+3]->rx_descriptor_fields1,
                                 pkt_mb4);

But now vlan_tci is swapped with buf_len.
Which means 2 things to me:
It is more than 16B away from rx_descriptor_fields1 and can't be updated in one go anymore,
and instead of vlan_tci we are updating buf_len.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 	/Bruce
> > > > > > >
> > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > >
> > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > impact of this set may be?
> > > >
> > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > current version.
> > > >
> > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > >
> > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > >
> > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > like this.
> > >
> >
> > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.
> 
> Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> 
> > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> >
> > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > cmdline:
> > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> >

After applying the patch below got nearly original numbers (though not quite) on my box.
dpdk.org mainline:           50.8
with Olivier patch:           47.8
with patch below:            50.4
What I tried to do in it - avoid unnecessary updates of mbuf inside rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
For one segment per packet it seems to help.
Though so far I didn't try it on i40e and didn't do any testing for multi-seg scenario.
Konstantin

$ cat patch.mod4
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index d7af852..558233f 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -1283,12 +1283,28 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
        __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);

-       if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0)) {
+       if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1)) {
+
+               if (m->next != NULL) {
+                       m->next = NULL;
+                       m->nb_segs = 1;
+               }
+
+               if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
+                       rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
+
+               return m;
+
+       } else if (rte_atomic16_add_return(&m->refcnt_atomic, -1) == 0) {
+
                if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
                        rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);

-               m->next = NULL;
-               m->nb_segs = 1;
+               if (m->next != NULL) {
+                       m->next = NULL;
+                       m->nb_segs = 1;
+               }
+
                rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);

                return m;

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Morten Brørup]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev,
> Konstantin
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 3:01 AM
> 
> After applying the patch below got nearly original numbers (though not
> quite) on my box.
> dpdk.org mainline:           50.8
> with Olivier patch:           47.8
> with patch below:            50.4
> What I tried to do in it - avoid unnecessary updates of mbuf inside
> rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
> For one segment per packet it seems to help.
> Though so far I didn't try it on i40e and didn't do any testing for
> multi-seg scenario.
> Konstantin
> 
> $ cat patch.mod4
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> index d7af852..558233f 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> @@ -1283,12 +1283,28 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)  {
>         __rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
> 
> -       if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0)) {
> +       if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1)) {
> +
> +               if (m->next != NULL) {
> +                       m->next = NULL;
> +                       m->nb_segs = 1;
> +               }
> +
> +               if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
> +                       rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> +
> +               return m;
> +
> +       } else if (rte_atomic16_add_return(&m->refcnt_atomic, -1) == 0)
> + {
> +
>                 if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
>                         rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> 
> -               m->next = NULL;
> -               m->nb_segs = 1;
> +               if (m->next != NULL) {
> +                       m->next = NULL;
> +                       m->nb_segs = 1;
> +               }
> +
>                 rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
> 
>                 return m;

Maybe the access to the second cache line (for single-segment packets) can be avoided altogether in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() by adding a multi-segment indication flag to the first cache line, and using this flag instead of the test for m->next != NULL.

Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Hi,

On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:00:49 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:  
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 	/Bruce  
> > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > > impact of this set may be?  
> > > > >
> > > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > > current version.
> > > > >  
> > > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > > >
> > > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > > like this.
> > > >  
> > >
> > > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.  
> > 
> > Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> > So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> >   
> > > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> > >
> > > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > > cmdline:
> > > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> > > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> > >  
> 
> After applying the patch below got nearly original numbers (though not quite) on my box.
> dpdk.org mainline:           50.8
> with Olivier patch:           47.8
> with patch below:            50.4
> What I tried to do in it - avoid unnecessary updates of mbuf inside rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
> For one segment per packet it seems to help.
> Though so far I didn't try it on i40e and didn't do any testing for multi-seg scenario.
> Konstantin

I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss with 1c/1t
(ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here is what I have in MPPS:

1c/1t   1c/2t
53.3    58.7     current
52.1    58.8     original patchset
53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch

So we have 2 options here:

1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you, by the way)
2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we have something that
   really no impact

I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in terms
of cycles per packet.


Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:06:35 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:48 PM
> > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier Matz
> > <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> > nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:45 PM
> > > To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> > > nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > >
> > >
> > >  
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:  
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 	/Bruce  
> > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > > impact of this set may be?  
> > > > >
> > > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > > current version.
> > > > >  
> > > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > > >
> > > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > > like this.
> > > >  
> > >
> > > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.  
> > 
> > Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> > So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> >   
> > > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> > >
> > > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > > cmdline:
> > > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> > > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> > >  
> 
> Actually one more question regarding:
> [dpdk-dev,9/9] mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields
> 
> diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> index fd97bd3..ada98d5 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> @@ -449,8 +449,7 @@  struct rte_mbuf {
>  
>  	uint32_t pkt_len;         /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segments. */
>  	uint16_t data_len;        /**< Amount of data in segment buffer. */
> -	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
> -	uint16_t vlan_tci;
> +	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Size of segment buffer. */
>  
>  	union {
>  		uint32_t rss;     /**< RSS hash result if RSS enabled */
> @@ -475,11 +474,11 @@  struct rte_mbuf {
>  		uint32_t usr;	  /**< User defined tags. See rte_distributor_process() */
>  	} hash;                   /**< hash information */
>  
> +	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
> +	uint16_t vlan_tci;
>  	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
>  	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
>  
> -	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
> -
>  	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time reference
>  	 * are not normalized but are always the same for a given port.
>  	 */
> 
> How ixgbe and i40e SSE version supposed to work correctly after  that change?
> As I remember both of them sets vlan_tci as part of 16B shuffle operation.
> Something like that:
> pkt_mb4 = _mm_shuffle_epi8(descs[3], shuf_msk);
> ...
> mm_storeu_si128((void *)&rx_pkts[pos+3]->rx_descriptor_fields1,
>                                  pkt_mb4);
> 
> But now vlan_tci is swapped with buf_len.
> Which means 2 things to me:
> It is more than 16B away from rx_descriptor_fields1 and can't be updated in one go anymore,
> and instead of vlan_tci we are updating buf_len.


Sorry, I missed it. But this shows something problematic: changing the
order of fields in a structure breaks code without notification. I think
that drivers expecting a field at a specific position should have some
BUG_ON() to check that the condition is still valid. We can't expect anyone
to know all the constraints of all vectors PMDs in DPDK.

The original idea of this patch was to group vlan_tci and vlan_outer_tci,
which looked to be a good idea at first glance. If it requires to change
all vector code, let's drop it.

Just for the exercice, let's imagine we need that patch. What would be
the procedure to have it integrated? How can we detect there is an issue?
Who would be in charge of modifying all the vector code in PMDs?


Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:26:10AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:00:49 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:  
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 	/Bruce  
> > > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > > > impact of this set may be?  
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > > > current version.
> > > > > >  
> > > > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > > > like this.
> > > > >  
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > > > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.  
> > > 
> > > Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> > > So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> > >   
> > > > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > > > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > > > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > > > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> > > >
> > > > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > > > cmdline:
> > > > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> > > > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> > > >  
> > 
> > After applying the patch below got nearly original numbers (though not quite) on my box.
> > dpdk.org mainline:           50.8
> > with Olivier patch:           47.8
> > with patch below:            50.4
> > What I tried to do in it - avoid unnecessary updates of mbuf inside rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
> > For one segment per packet it seems to help.
> > Though so far I didn't try it on i40e and didn't do any testing for multi-seg scenario.
> > Konstantin
> 
> I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss with 1c/1t
> (ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here is what I have in MPPS:
> 
> 1c/1t   1c/2t
> 53.3    58.7     current
> 52.1    58.8     original patchset
> 53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
> 53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch
> 
> So we have 2 options here:
> 
> 1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you, by the way)
> 2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we have something that
>    really no impact
> 
> I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in terms
> of cycles per packet.
> 
> 
1 is certainly the more attractive option. However, I think we can
afford to spend a little more time looking at this before we decide.
I'll try and check out the perf numbers I get with i40e with
Konstantin's patch today. We also need to double check the other
possible issues he reported in his other emails. While I don't want this
patchset held up for a long time, I think an extra 24/48 hours is
probably needed on it.

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:41:39 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:26:10AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:00:49 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >    
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > > > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:    
> > > > > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:    
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:    
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:    
> > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > > > > >    
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 	/Bruce    
> > > > > > > > > >    
> > > > > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > > > > impact of this set may be?    
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > > > > current version.
> > > > > > >    
> > > > > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > > > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > > > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > > > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > > > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > > > > like this.
> > > > > >    
> > > > >
> > > > > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > > > > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.    
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> > > > So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> > > >     
> > > > > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > > > > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > > > > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > > > > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> > > > >
> > > > > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > > > > cmdline:
> > > > > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> > > > > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> > > > >    
> > > 
> > > After applying the patch below got nearly original numbers (though not quite) on my box.
> > > dpdk.org mainline:           50.8
> > > with Olivier patch:           47.8
> > > with patch below:            50.4
> > > What I tried to do in it - avoid unnecessary updates of mbuf inside rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
> > > For one segment per packet it seems to help.
> > > Though so far I didn't try it on i40e and didn't do any testing for multi-seg scenario.
> > > Konstantin  
> > 
> > I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss with 1c/1t
> > (ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here is what I have in MPPS:
> > 
> > 1c/1t   1c/2t
> > 53.3    58.7     current
> > 52.1    58.8     original patchset
> > 53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
> > 53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch
> > 
> > So we have 2 options here:
> > 
> > 1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you, by the way)
> > 2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we have something that
> >    really no impact
> > 
> > I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in terms
> > of cycles per packet.
> > 
> >   
> 1 is certainly the more attractive option. However, I think we can
> afford to spend a little more time looking at this before we decide.
> I'll try and check out the perf numbers I get with i40e with
> Konstantin's patch today. We also need to double check the other
> possible issues he reported in his other emails. While I don't want this
> patchset held up for a long time, I think an extra 24/48 hours is
> probably needed on it.
> 

Yes, now that we have the "test momentum", try not to loose it ;)

I'm guilty to have missed the performance loss, but honnestly,
I'm a bit sad that nobody tried to this patchset before (it
is available for more than 2 months), knowing this is probably one of
the most critical part of dpdk. I think we need to be better next
time.

Anyway, thank you for your test and feedback now.

Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi guys,

> 
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:41:39 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:26:10AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:00:49 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > > > > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 	/Bruce
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > > > > > impact of this set may be?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > > > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > > > > > current version.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > > > > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > > > > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > > > > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > > > > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > > > > > like this.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > > > > > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> > > > > So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > > > > > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > > > > > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > > > > > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> > > > > >
> > > > > > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > > > > > cmdline:
> > > > > > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w
> 07:00.1 -w
> > > > > > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > After applying the patch below got nearly original numbers (though not quite) on my box.
> > > > dpdk.org mainline:           50.8
> > > > with Olivier patch:           47.8
> > > > with patch below:            50.4
> > > > What I tried to do in it - avoid unnecessary updates of mbuf inside rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
> > > > For one segment per packet it seems to help.
> > > > Though so far I didn't try it on i40e and didn't do any testing for multi-seg scenario.
> > > > Konstantin
> > >
> > > I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss with 1c/1t
> > > (ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here is what I have in MPPS:
> > >
> > > 1c/1t   1c/2t
> > > 53.3    58.7     current
> > > 52.1    58.8     original patchset
> > > 53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
> > > 53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch
> > >
> > > So we have 2 options here:
> > >
> > > 1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you, by the way)
> > > 2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we have something that
> > >    really no impact
> > >
> > > I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in terms
> > > of cycles per packet.
> > >
> > >
> > 1 is certainly the more attractive option. However, I think we can
> > afford to spend a little more time looking at this before we decide.
> > I'll try and check out the perf numbers I get with i40e with
> > Konstantin's patch today. We also need to double check the other
> > possible issues he reported in his other emails. While I don't want this
> > patchset held up for a long time, I think an extra 24/48 hours is
> > probably needed on it.
> >
> 
> Yes, now that we have the "test momentum", try not to loose it ;)
> 
> I'm guilty to have missed the performance loss, but honnestly,
> I'm a bit sad that nobody tried to this patchset before (it
> is available for more than 2 months), knowing this is probably one of
> the most critical part of dpdk. I think we need to be better next
> time.
> 
> Anyway, thank you for your test and feedback now.

I am also leaning towards option 1, but agree that some extra testing first
need to be done before making the final decision.
BTW, path #9 need to be removed anyway, even if will go for path #1.
Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:59:25AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:41:39 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:26:10AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:00:49 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >    
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > > > > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:    
> > > > > > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:    
> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:    
> > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:    
> > > > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > > > > > >    
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 	/Bruce    
> > > > > > > > > > >    
> > > > > > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > > > > > impact of this set may be?    
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > > > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > > > > > current version.
> > > > > > > >    
> > > > > > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > > > > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > > > > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > > > > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > > > > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > > > > > like this.
> > > > > > >    
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > > > > > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.    
> > > > > 
> > > > > Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> > > > > So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> > > > >     
> > > > > > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > > > > > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > > > > > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > > > > > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> > > > > >
> > > > > > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > > > > > cmdline:
> > > > > > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -w
> > > > > > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> > > > > >    
> > > > 
> > > > After applying the patch below got nearly original numbers (though not quite) on my box.
> > > > dpdk.org mainline:           50.8
> > > > with Olivier patch:           47.8
> > > > with patch below:            50.4
> > > > What I tried to do in it - avoid unnecessary updates of mbuf inside rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
> > > > For one segment per packet it seems to help.
> > > > Though so far I didn't try it on i40e and didn't do any testing for multi-seg scenario.
> > > > Konstantin  
> > > 
> > > I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss with 1c/1t
> > > (ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here is what I have in MPPS:
> > > 
> > > 1c/1t   1c/2t
> > > 53.3    58.7     current
> > > 52.1    58.8     original patchset
> > > 53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
> > > 53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch
> > > 
> > > So we have 2 options here:
> > > 
> > > 1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you, by the way)
> > > 2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we have something that
> > >    really no impact
> > > 
> > > I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in terms
> > > of cycles per packet.
> > > 
> > >   
> > 1 is certainly the more attractive option. However, I think we can
> > afford to spend a little more time looking at this before we decide.
> > I'll try and check out the perf numbers I get with i40e with
> > Konstantin's patch today. We also need to double check the other
> > possible issues he reported in his other emails. While I don't want this
> > patchset held up for a long time, I think an extra 24/48 hours is
> > probably needed on it.
> > 
> 
> Yes, now that we have the "test momentum", try not to loose it ;)
> 
> I'm guilty to have missed the performance loss, but honnestly,
> I'm a bit sad that nobody tried to this patchset before (it
> is available for more than 2 months), knowing this is probably one of
> the most critical part of dpdk. I think we need to be better next
> time.

No disagreement here.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:18:22 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> BTW, path #9 need to be removed anyway, even if will go for path #1.

Yes

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Olivier,

> 
> On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 18:06:35 +0000, "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:48 PM
> > > To: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier Matz
> > > <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> > > nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 5:45 PM
> > > > To: Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> > > > nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Richardson, Bruce
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 1:23 PM
> > > > > To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 02:02:36PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, 30 Mar 2017 10:31:08 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 09:09:23PM +0100, Bruce Richardson wrote:
> > > > > > > > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> > > > > > > > > Can it be applied?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > Olivier
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I assume all driver maintainers have done performance analysis to check
> > > > > > > > for regressions. Perhaps they can confirm this is the case.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 	/Bruce
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In the absence, of anyone else reporting performance numbers with this
> > > > > > > patchset, I ran a single-thread testpmd test using 2 x 40G ports (i40e)
> > > > > > > driver. With RX & TX descriptor ring sizes of 512 or above, I'm seeing a
> > > > > > > fairly noticable performance drop. I still need to dig in more, e.g. do
> > > > > > > an RFC2544 zero-loss test, and also bisect the patchset to see what
> > > > > > > parts may be causing the problem.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Has anyone else tried any other drivers or systems to see what the perf
> > > > > > > impact of this set may be?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I did, of course. I didn't see any noticeable performance drop on
> > > > > > ixgbe (4 NICs, one port per NIC, 1 core). I can replay the test with
> > > > > > current version.
> > > > > >
> > > > > I had no doubt you did some perf testing! :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Perhaps the regression I see is limited to i40e driver. I've confirmed I
> > > > > still see it with that driver in zero-loss tests, so next step is to try
> > > > > and localise what change in the patchset is causing it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Ideally, though, I think we should see acks or other comments from
> > > > > driver maintainers at least confirming that they have tested. You cannot
> > > > > be held responsible for testing every DPDK driver before you submit work
> > > > > like this.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Unfortunately  I also see a regression.
> > > > Did a quick flood test on 2.8 GHZ IVB with 4x10Gb.
> > >
> > > Sorry, forgot to mention - it is on ixgbe.
> > > So it doesn't look like i40e specific.
> > >
> > > > Observed a drop even with default testpmd RXD/TXD numbers (128/512):
> > > > from 50.8 Mpps down to 47.8 Mpps.
> > > > From what I am seeing the particular patch that causing it:
> > > > [dpdk-dev,3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> > > >
> > > > cc version 5.3.1 20160406 (Red Hat 5.3.1-6) (GCC)
> > > > cmdline:
> > > > ./dpdk.org-1705-mbuf1/x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd  --lcores='7,8'  -n 4 --socket-mem='1024,0'  -w 04:00.1 -w 07:00.1 -
> w
> > > > 0b:00.1 -w 0e:00.1 -- -i
> > > >
> >
> > Actually one more question regarding:
> > [dpdk-dev,9/9] mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields
> >
> > diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > index fd97bd3..ada98d5 100644
> > --- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > +++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
> > @@ -449,8 +449,7 @@  struct rte_mbuf {
> >
> >  	uint32_t pkt_len;         /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segments. */
> >  	uint16_t data_len;        /**< Amount of data in segment buffer. */
> > -	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
> > -	uint16_t vlan_tci;
> > +	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Size of segment buffer. */
> >
> >  	union {
> >  		uint32_t rss;     /**< RSS hash result if RSS enabled */
> > @@ -475,11 +474,11 @@  struct rte_mbuf {
> >  		uint32_t usr;	  /**< User defined tags. See rte_distributor_process() */
> >  	} hash;                   /**< hash information */
> >
> > +	/** VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_VLAN_STRIPPED is set. */
> > +	uint16_t vlan_tci;
> >  	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
> >  	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
> >
> > -	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
> > -
> >  	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time reference
> >  	 * are not normalized but are always the same for a given port.
> >  	 */
> >
> > How ixgbe and i40e SSE version supposed to work correctly after  that change?
> > As I remember both of them sets vlan_tci as part of 16B shuffle operation.
> > Something like that:
> > pkt_mb4 = _mm_shuffle_epi8(descs[3], shuf_msk);
> > ...
> > mm_storeu_si128((void *)&rx_pkts[pos+3]->rx_descriptor_fields1,
> >                                  pkt_mb4);
> >
> > But now vlan_tci is swapped with buf_len.
> > Which means 2 things to me:
> > It is more than 16B away from rx_descriptor_fields1 and can't be updated in one go anymore,
> > and instead of vlan_tci we are updating buf_len.
> 
> 
> Sorry, I missed it. But this shows something problematic: changing the
> order of fields in a structure breaks code without notification. I think
> that drivers expecting a field at a specific position should have some
> BUG_ON() to check that the condition is still valid. We can't expect anyone
> to know all the constraints of all vectors PMDs in DPDK.
> 
> The original idea of this patch was to group vlan_tci and vlan_outer_tci,
> which looked to be a good idea at first glance. If it requires to change
> all vector code, let's drop it.
> 
> Just for the exercice, let's imagine we need that patch. What would be
> the procedure to have it integrated? How can we detect there is an issue?
> Who would be in charge of modifying all the vector code in PMDs?
> 

Indeed right now there is no way to know what is PMD requirement on mbuf layout.
Adding BUG_ON() into particular RX/TX implementation that has such constrains seems
like a very good idea to me.
Apart from that I don't know off-hand how we can make restructuring mbuf less painful.
Konstantin
 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Nélio Laranjeiro]

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:56:29PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Does anyone have any other comment on this series?
> Can it be applied?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Olivier
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed,  8 Mar 2017 10:41:52 +0100, Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com> wrote:
> > Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> > the mbuf.
> > 
> > The main changes are:
> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >   platforms.
> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
> >   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
> >   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
> >   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
> >   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> > 
> > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
> >   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
> >   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> > - remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
> >   and some people highlighted they are using it.
> > - moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
> >   it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
> > - merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
> >   were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
> >   so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.
> > 
> > I made some basic performance tests (ixgbe) and see no regression.
> > Other tests from NIC vendors are welcome.
> > 
> > Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> > by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> > idea of what could be done.
> > 
> > [1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html
> > 
> > rfc->v1:
> > - fix reset of mbuf fields in case of indirect mbuf in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
> > - do not enforce a unit or time reference for m->timestamp
> > - reorganize fields to make vlan and outer vlan consecutive
> > - enhance documentation of m->refcnt and m->port to explain why they are 16bits
> > 
> > Jerin Jacob (1):
> >   mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned
> > 
> > Olivier Matz (8):
> >   mbuf: make segment prefree function public
> >   mbuf: make raw free function public
> >   mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> >   drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
> >   mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
> >   mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
> >   mbuf: add a timestamp field
> >   mbuf: reorder VLAN tci and buffer len fields
> > 
> >  app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
> >  drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
> >  drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
> >  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
> >  drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
> >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
> >  drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
> >  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
> >  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
> >  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c                   |   3 +-
> >  drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
> >  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   4 -
> >  drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
> >  .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 123 ++++++++++++++++-----
> >  19 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)
> > 

Tested-by: Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>

with mlx5 ConnectX-4 two ports with a single thread IO forwarding.

Olivier patches: increase performance by +0.4Mpps.
Olivier + Konstantin patches: increase performance by +0.8Mpps.

Regards,

-- 
Nélio Laranjeiro
6WIND

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:41:55AM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Set the value of m->refcnt to 1, m->nb_segs to 1 and m->next
> to NULL when the mbuf is stored inside the mempool (unused).
> This is done in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), before freeing or
> recycling a mbuf.
> 
> Before this patch, the value of m->refcnt was expected to be 0
> while in pool.
> 
> The objectives are:
> 
> - to avoid drivers to set m->next to NULL in the early Rx path, since
>   this field is in the second 64B of the mbuf and its access could
>   trigger a cache miss
> 
> - rationalize the behavior of raw_alloc/raw_free: one is now the
>   symmetric of the other, and refcnt is never changed in these functions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  5 ++---
>  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  1 +
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c       |  2 ++
>  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
<snip>
>  /**
> @@ -1244,9 +1262,13 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
>  	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
>  
>  	if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0)) {
> -		/* if this is an indirect mbuf, it is detached. */
>  		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
>  			rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> +
> +		m->next = NULL;
> +		m->nb_segs = 1;
> +		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
> +
>  		return m;
>  	}
>  	return NULL;

Do we need to make this change to prefree_seg? If we update the detach
function to set the next point to null on detaching a segment, and if we
change the "free" function which frees a whole chain of mbufs, we should
be covered, should we not? If we are freeing a standalone segment, that
segment should already have it's nb_segs and next pointers correct.

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richardson, Bruce
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 12:22 PM
> To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey
> <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
> 
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:41:55AM +0100, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > Set the value of m->refcnt to 1, m->nb_segs to 1 and m->next
> > to NULL when the mbuf is stored inside the mempool (unused).
> > This is done in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), before freeing or
> > recycling a mbuf.
> >
> > Before this patch, the value of m->refcnt was expected to be 0
> > while in pool.
> >
> > The objectives are:
> >
> > - to avoid drivers to set m->next to NULL in the early Rx path, since
> >   this field is in the second 64B of the mbuf and its access could
> >   trigger a cache miss
> >
> > - rationalize the behavior of raw_alloc/raw_free: one is now the
> >   symmetric of the other, and refcnt is never changed in these functions.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c     |  5 ++---
> >  drivers/net/mpipe/mpipe_tilegx.c |  1 +
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c       |  2 ++
> >  lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h       | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >  4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> <snip>
> >  /**
> > @@ -1244,9 +1262,13 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
> >  	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
> >
> >  	if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0)) {
> > -		/* if this is an indirect mbuf, it is detached. */
> >  		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
> >  			rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
> > +
> > +		m->next = NULL;
> > +		m->nb_segs = 1;
> > +		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
> > +
> >  		return m;
> >  	}
> >  	return NULL;
> 
> Do we need to make this change to prefree_seg? If we update the detach
> function to set the next point to null on detaching a segment, and if we
> change the "free" function which frees a whole chain of mbufs, we should
> be covered, should we not? If we are freeing a standalone segment, that
> segment should already have it's nb_segs and next pointers correct.

detach() is invoked only for indirect mbufs.
We can have a chain of direct mbufs too.
About free() - most PMD use either rte_pktmbuf_free_seg()
or rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg();rte_mempool_put_bulk(); directly.
Konstantin

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Thomas Monjalon]

2017-03-31 09:18, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:41:39 +0100, Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:26:10AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss with 1c/1t
> > > > (ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here is what I have in MPPS:
> > > >
> > > > 1c/1t   1c/2t
> > > > 53.3    58.7     current
> > > > 52.1    58.8     original patchset
> > > > 53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
> > > > 53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch
> > > >
> > > > So we have 2 options here:
> > > >
> > > > 1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you, by the way)
> > > > 2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we have something that
> > > >    really no impact
> > > >
> > > > I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in terms
> > > > of cycles per packet.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > 1 is certainly the more attractive option. However, I think we can
> > > afford to spend a little more time looking at this before we decide.
> > > I'll try and check out the perf numbers I get with i40e with
> > > Konstantin's patch today. We also need to double check the other
> > > possible issues he reported in his other emails. While I don't want this
> > > patchset held up for a long time, I think an extra 24/48 hours is
> > > probably needed on it.
> > >
> > 
> > Yes, now that we have the "test momentum", try not to loose it ;)
> > 
> > I'm guilty to have missed the performance loss, but honnestly,
> > I'm a bit sad that nobody tried to this patchset before (it
> > is available for more than 2 months), knowing this is probably one of
> > the most critical part of dpdk. I think we need to be better next
> > time.
> > 
> > Anyway, thank you for your test and feedback now.
> 
> I am also leaning towards option 1, but agree that some extra testing first
> need to be done before making the final decision.
> BTW, path #9 need to be removed anyway, even if will go for path #1.
> Konstantin

Please, can we have a conclusion now?

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 18:15:25 +0200
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:

> 2017-03-31 09:18, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > > On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:41:39 +0100, Bruce Richardson
> > > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:26:10AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss
> > > > > with 1c/1t (ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here
> > > > > is what I have in MPPS:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1c/1t   1c/2t
> > > > > 53.3    58.7     current
> > > > > 52.1    58.8     original patchset
> > > > > 53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
> > > > > 53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch
> > > > >
> > > > > So we have 2 options here:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you,
> > > > > by the way) 2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we
> > > > > have something that really no impact
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in
> > > > > terms of cycles per packet.
> > > > >
> > > > >  
> > > > 1 is certainly the more attractive option. However, I think we
> > > > can afford to spend a little more time looking at this before
> > > > we decide. I'll try and check out the perf numbers I get with
> > > > i40e with Konstantin's patch today. We also need to double
> > > > check the other possible issues he reported in his other
> > > > emails. While I don't want this patchset held up for a long
> > > > time, I think an extra 24/48 hours is probably needed on it.
> > > >  
> > > 
> > > Yes, now that we have the "test momentum", try not to loose it ;)
> > > 
> > > I'm guilty to have missed the performance loss, but honnestly,
> > > I'm a bit sad that nobody tried to this patchset before (it
> > > is available for more than 2 months), knowing this is probably
> > > one of the most critical part of dpdk. I think we need to be
> > > better next time.
> > > 
> > > Anyway, thank you for your test and feedback now.  
> > 
> > I am also leaning towards option 1, but agree that some extra
> > testing first need to be done before making the final decision.
> > BTW, path #9 need to be removed anyway, even if will go for path #1.
> > Konstantin  
> 
> Please, can we have a conclusion now?

I think we sholuld go with proposition 1, I can resubmit an updated
patch today.

This rework is needed at least for metrics libraries.

To summarize the perf data we have:
- There is a small impact on Intel NICs (-0.4MPPS on ixgbe in iofwd
  mode according to Konstantin's test, which is less than 1%). I guess
  it can be optimized.
- On mlx5, there is a gain (+0.8MPPS).
- On sfc, there is also a gain.

Any comment?

Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/9] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Bruce Richardson]

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 09:58:49AM +0200, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Apr 2017 18:15:25 +0200
> Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> 
> > 2017-03-31 09:18, Ananyev, Konstantin:
> > > > On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:41:39 +0100, Bruce Richardson
> > > > <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:  
> > > > > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:26:10AM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > > > I replayed my tests, and I can also see a performance loss
> > > > > > with 1c/1t (ixgbe), not in the same magnitude however. Here
> > > > > > is what I have in MPPS:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1c/1t   1c/2t
> > > > > > 53.3    58.7     current
> > > > > > 52.1    58.8     original patchset
> > > > > > 53.3    58.8     removed patches 3 and 9
> > > > > > 53.1    58.7     with konstantin's patch
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So we have 2 options here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1/ integrate Konstantin's patch in the patchset (thank you,
> > > > > > by the way) 2/ remove patch 3, and keep it for later until we
> > > > > > have something that really no impact
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd prefer 1/, knowing that the difference is really small in
> > > > > > terms of cycles per packet.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >  
> > > > > 1 is certainly the more attractive option. However, I think we
> > > > > can afford to spend a little more time looking at this before
> > > > > we decide. I'll try and check out the perf numbers I get with
> > > > > i40e with Konstantin's patch today. We also need to double
> > > > > check the other possible issues he reported in his other
> > > > > emails. While I don't want this patchset held up for a long
> > > > > time, I think an extra 24/48 hours is probably needed on it.
> > > > >  
> > > > 
> > > > Yes, now that we have the "test momentum", try not to loose it ;)
> > > > 
> > > > I'm guilty to have missed the performance loss, but honnestly,
> > > > I'm a bit sad that nobody tried to this patchset before (it
> > > > is available for more than 2 months), knowing this is probably
> > > > one of the most critical part of dpdk. I think we need to be
> > > > better next time.
> > > > 
> > > > Anyway, thank you for your test and feedback now.  
> > > 
> > > I am also leaning towards option 1, but agree that some extra
> > > testing first need to be done before making the final decision.
> > > BTW, path #9 need to be removed anyway, even if will go for path #1.
> > > Konstantin  
> > 
> > Please, can we have a conclusion now?
> 
> I think we sholuld go with proposition 1, I can resubmit an updated
> patch today.
> 
> This rework is needed at least for metrics libraries.
> 
> To summarize the perf data we have:
> - There is a small impact on Intel NICs (-0.4MPPS on ixgbe in iofwd
>   mode according to Konstantin's test, which is less than 1%). I guess
>   it can be optimized.
> - On mlx5, there is a gain (+0.8MPPS).
> - On sfc, there is also a gain.
> 
> Any comment?
> 
> Olivier

Hi,

As you have probably seen from the patches I sent yesterday, there are
optimizations we can make to our i40e (and ixgbe) drivers on top of this
patchset which should compensate for any performance loss due to the
mbuf rework. Therefore, we are ok to have this merged, so long as our
PMD enhancements based on this set can also be merged (they are not
large, so I assume this should not be controvertial). The i40e patches
are on the list; an equivalent set for ixgbe should be submitted by
Konstantin shortly.

Regards,
/Bruce

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] reduce writes to mbuf in ixgbe vRX

[Konstantin Ananyev]

Pretty much the same as one from Bruce:
http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-April/062936.html
but now for ixgbe.
Based on Olivier's mbuf rework patchset, and makes some
improvement to the ixgbe driver taking account of the rework.
It also removes a build-time option that seems unnecessary.

Depends on: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/059693.html

Konstantin Ananyev (2):
  net/ixgbe: eliminate mbuf write on rearm
  net/ixgbe: remove option to disable offload flags

 config/common_base                        |  1 -
 doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst                 | 18 ----------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  7 ----
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c   | 11 ------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 58 +++++++++++++------------------
 5 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)

-- 
2.5.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] net/ixgbe: eliminate mbuf write on rearm

[Konstantin Ananyev]

With the mbuf rework, we now have 8 contiguous bytes to be rearmed in the
mbuf just before the 8-bytes of olflags. If we don't do the rearm write
inside the descriptor ring replenishment function, and delay it to
receiving the packet, we can do a single 16B write inside the RX function
to set both the rearm data, and the flags together.

Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 62afe31..49536c1 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -82,19 +82,23 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 	/* Initialize the mbufs in vector, process 2 mbufs in one loop */
 	for (i = 0; i < RTE_IXGBE_RXQ_REARM_THRESH; i += 2, rxep += 2) {
 		__m128i vaddr0, vaddr1;
-		uintptr_t p0, p1;
 
 		mb0 = rxep[0].mbuf;
 		mb1 = rxep[1].mbuf;
 
-		/*
-		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
-		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 */
-		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
-		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
-		p1 = (uintptr_t)&mb1->rearm_data;
-		*(uint64_t *)p1 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
+#ifndef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
+		{
+			uintptr_t p0, p1;
+			/*
+			 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
+			 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
+			 */
+			p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
+			*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
+			p1 = (uintptr_t)&mb1->rearm_data;
+			*(uint64_t *)p1 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
+		}
+#endif
 
 		/* load buf_addr(lo 64bit) and buf_physaddr(hi 64bit) */
 		vaddr0 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i *)&(mb0->buf_addr));
@@ -139,14 +143,11 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 #ifdef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
 
 static inline void
-desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], uint8_t vlan_flags,
+desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], __m128i mbuf_init, uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts)
 {
 	__m128i ptype0, ptype1, vtag0, vtag1, csum;
-	union {
-		uint16_t e[4];
-		uint64_t dword;
-	} vol;
+	__m128i rearm0, rearm1, rearm2, rearm3;
 
 	/* mask everything except rss type */
 	const __m128i rsstype_msk = _mm_set_epi16(
@@ -225,12 +226,25 @@ desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	vtag1 = _mm_or_si128(vtag0, vtag1);
 
 	vtag1 = _mm_or_si128(ptype0, vtag1);
-	vol.dword = _mm_cvtsi128_si64(vtag1);
 
-	rx_pkts[0]->ol_flags = vol.e[0];
-	rx_pkts[1]->ol_flags = vol.e[1];
-	rx_pkts[2]->ol_flags = vol.e[2];
-	rx_pkts[3]->ol_flags = vol.e[3];
+	/*
+	 * At this point, we have the 4 sets of flags in the low 64-bits
+	 * of vtag1 (4x16).
+	 * We want to extract these, and merge them with the mbuf init data
+	 * so we can do a single 16-byte write to the mbuf to set the flags
+	 * and all the other initialization fields. Extracting the
+	 * appropriate flags means that we have to do a shift and blend for
+	 * each mbuf before we do the write.
+	*/
+	rearm0 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 8), 0x10);
+	rearm1 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 6), 0x10);
+	rearm2 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 4), 0x10);
+	rearm3 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 2), 0x10);
+
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[0]->rearm_data, rearm0);
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[1]->rearm_data, rearm1);
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[2]->rearm_data, rearm2);
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[3]->rearm_data, rearm3);
 }
 #else
 #define desc_to_olflags_v(desc, vlan_flags, rx_pkts) do { \
@@ -265,6 +279,7 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 				0, 0            /* ignore pkt_type field */
 			);
 	__m128i dd_check, eop_check;
+	__m128i mbuf_init;
 	uint8_t vlan_flags;
 
 	/* nb_pkts shall be less equal than RTE_IXGBE_MAX_RX_BURST */
@@ -310,6 +325,8 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 		0xFF, 0xFF
 		);
 
+	mbuf_init = _mm_set_epi64x(0, rxq->mbuf_initializer);
+
 	/* Cache is empty -> need to scan the buffer rings, but first move
 	 * the next 'n' mbufs into the cache
 	 */
@@ -382,7 +399,7 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 		sterr_tmp1 = _mm_unpackhi_epi32(descs[1], descs[0]);
 
 		/* set ol_flags with vlan packet type */
-		desc_to_olflags_v(descs, vlan_flags, &rx_pkts[pos]);
+		desc_to_olflags_v(descs, mbuf_init, vlan_flags, &rx_pkts[pos]);
 
 		/* D.2 pkt 3,4 set in_port/nb_seg and remove crc */
 		pkt_mb4 = _mm_add_epi16(pkt_mb4, crc_adjust);
-- 
2.5.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] net/ixgbe: remove option to disable offload flags

[Konstantin Ananyev]

Having packets received without any offload flags given in the mbuf is not
very useful, and performance tests with testpmd indicates little
benefit is got with the current code by turning off the flags. This makes
the build-time option pointless, so we can remove it.

Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
---
 config/common_base                        |  1 -
 doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst                 | 18 ------------------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  7 -------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c   | 11 -----------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 27 ---------------------------
 5 files changed, 64 deletions(-)

diff --git a/config/common_base b/config/common_base
index fc75c63..8d9560f 100644
--- a/config/common_base
+++ b/config/common_base
@@ -173,7 +173,6 @@ CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_DEBUG_TX_FREE=n
 CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_DEBUG_DRIVER=n
 CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_PF_DISABLE_STRIP_CRC=n
 CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_INC_VECTOR=y
-CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=y
 
 #
 # Compile burst-oriented I40E PMD driver
diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst b/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst
index 1a4aa48..130765b 100644
--- a/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst
@@ -95,9 +95,6 @@ Other features are supported using optional MACRO configuration. They include:
 
 *   HW extend dual VLAN
 
-*   Enabled by RX_OLFLAGS (RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=y)
-
-
 To guarantee the constraint, configuration flags in dev_conf.rxmode will be checked:
 
 *   hw_vlan_strip
@@ -156,21 +153,6 @@ The declarations for the API functions are in the header ``rte_pmd_ixgbe.h``.
 Sample Application Notes
 ------------------------
 
-testpmd
-~~~~~~~
-
-By default, using CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=y:
-
-.. code-block:: console
-
-    ./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd -l 8-9 -n 4 -- -i --burst=32 --rxfreet=32 --mbcache=250 --txpt=32 --rxht=8 --rxwt=0 --txfreet=32 --txrst=32 --txqflags=0xf01
-
-When CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=n, better performance can be achieved:
-
-.. code-block:: console
-
-    ./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd -l 8-9 -n 4 -- -i --burst=32 --rxfreet=32 --mbcache=250 --txpt=32 --rxht=8 --rxwt=0 --txfreet=32 --txrst=32 --txqflags=0xf01 --disable-hw-vlan
-
 l3fwd
 ~~~~~
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
index a83afe5..1c34bb5 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -310,13 +310,6 @@ ixgbe_rx_vec_dev_conf_condition_check_default(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 	struct rte_eth_rxmode *rxmode = &dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode;
 	struct rte_fdir_conf *fconf = &dev->data->dev_conf.fdir_conf;
 
-#ifndef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-	/* whithout rx ol_flags, no VP flag report */
-	if (rxmode->hw_vlan_strip != 0 ||
-	    rxmode->hw_vlan_extend != 0)
-		return -1;
-#endif
-
 	/* no fdir support */
 	if (fconf->mode != RTE_FDIR_MODE_NONE)
 		return -1;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index bc8924f..517b8c7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -111,14 +111,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 	IXGBE_PCI_REG_WRITE(rxq->rdt_reg_addr, rx_id);
 }
 
-/* Handling the offload flags (olflags) field takes computation
- * time when receiving packets. Therefore we provide a flag to disable
- * the processing of the olflags field when they are not needed. This
- * gives improved performance, at the cost of losing the offload info
- * in the received packet
- */
-#ifdef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-
 #define VTAG_SHIFT     (3)
 
 static inline void
@@ -167,9 +159,6 @@ desc_to_olflags_v(uint8x16x2_t sterr_tmp1, uint8x16x2_t sterr_tmp2,
 	rx_pkts[2]->ol_flags = vol.e[2];
 	rx_pkts[3]->ol_flags = vol.e[3];
 }
-#else
-#define desc_to_olflags_v(sterr_tmp1, sterr_tmp2, staterr, rx_pkts)
-#endif
 
 /*
  * vPMD raw receive routine, only accept(nb_pkts >= RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 49536c1..28c0ca6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -86,20 +86,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		mb0 = rxep[0].mbuf;
 		mb1 = rxep[1].mbuf;
 
-#ifndef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-		{
-			uintptr_t p0, p1;
-			/*
-			 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
-			 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-			 */
-			p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
-			*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
-			p1 = (uintptr_t)&mb1->rearm_data;
-			*(uint64_t *)p1 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
-		}
-#endif
-
 		/* load buf_addr(lo 64bit) and buf_physaddr(hi 64bit) */
 		vaddr0 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i *)&(mb0->buf_addr));
 		vaddr1 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i *)&(mb1->buf_addr));
@@ -134,14 +120,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 	IXGBE_PCI_REG_WRITE(rxq->rdt_reg_addr, rx_id);
 }
 
-/* Handling the offload flags (olflags) field takes computation
- * time when receiving packets. Therefore we provide a flag to disable
- * the processing of the olflags field when they are not needed. This
- * gives improved performance, at the cost of losing the offload info
- * in the received packet
- */
-#ifdef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-
 static inline void
 desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], __m128i mbuf_init, uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts)
@@ -246,11 +224,6 @@ desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], __m128i mbuf_init, uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[2]->rearm_data, rearm2);
 	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[3]->rearm_data, rearm3);
 }
-#else
-#define desc_to_olflags_v(desc, vlan_flags, rx_pkts) do { \
-		RTE_SET_USED(vlan_flags); \
-	} while (0)
-#endif
 
 /*
  * vPMD raw receive routine, only accept(nb_pkts >= RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP)
-- 
2.5.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier Matz]

Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
the mbuf.

The main changes are:
- reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
  platforms.
- add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
  is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
  library may be added to do this job in the future.
- m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
  in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
  2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
- change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
- move seqn in the 2nd cache line

Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
- move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
  them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
  it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
- remove the m->port field: too much impact on many examples and libraries,
  and some people highlighted they are using it.
- moving m->next in the 1st cache line: there is not enough room, and having
  it set to NULL for unused mbuf should remove the need for it.
- merge seqn and timestamp together in a union: we could imagine use cases
  were both are activated. There is no flag indicating the presence of seqn,
  so it looks preferable to keep them separated for now.

Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
idea of what could be done.

[1] http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049338.html

v1->v2:
- remove reordering of vlan fields as it breaks pmd vector code
- optimize rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()

rfc->v1:
- fix reset of mbuf fields in case of indirect mbuf in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg()
- do not enforce a unit or time reference for m->timestamp
- reorganize fields to make vlan and outer vlan consecutive
- enhance documentation of m->refcnt and m->port to explain why they are 16bits



Jerin Jacob (1):
  mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned

Olivier Matz (7):
  mbuf: make segment prefree function public
  mbuf: make raw free function public
  mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool
  drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx
  mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments
  mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line
  mbuf: add a timestamp field

 app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                            |   4 +-
 drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c                       |   2 +-
 drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c                       |   2 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c                     |   6 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                 |   9 +-
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h            |   6 +-
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c               |  11 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c                     |  10 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h          |   6 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c            |   9 --
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c             |   9 --
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c                       |  11 +-
 drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c                    |   2 -
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c                   |   4 -
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h            |   6 +-
 .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h |   5 +-
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c                         |   4 +
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                         | 138 +++++++++++++++++----
 18 files changed, 144 insertions(+), 100 deletions(-)

-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/8] mbuf: make segment prefree function public

[Olivier Matz]

Document the function and make it public, since it is used at several
places in the drivers. The old one is marked as deprecated.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c              |  2 +-
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c            |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c        |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h   |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c            |  2 +-
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  6 +++---
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h   |  6 +++---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 8 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
index 343dabc64..1ee5cbb50 100644
--- a/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/enic/enic_rxtx.c
@@ -473,7 +473,7 @@ static inline void enic_free_wq_bufs(struct vnic_wq *wq, u16 completed_index)
 	pool = ((struct rte_mbuf *)buf->mb)->pool;
 	for (i = 0; i < nb_to_free; i++) {
 		buf = &wq->bufs[tail_idx];
-		m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg((struct rte_mbuf *)(buf->mb));
+		m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg((struct rte_mbuf *)(buf->mb));
 		buf->mb = NULL;
 
 		if (unlikely(m == NULL)) {
diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
index 144e5e6b1..c9bb04a0e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx.c
@@ -434,12 +434,12 @@ static inline void tx_free_bulk_mbuf(struct rte_mbuf **txep, int num)
 	if (unlikely(num == 0))
 		return;
 
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < num; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -455,7 +455,7 @@ static inline void tx_free_bulk_mbuf(struct rte_mbuf **txep, int num)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < num; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 			txep[i] = NULL;
diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
index 27f3e43ff..825e3c125 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
@@ -754,12 +754,12 @@ fm10k_tx_free_bufs(struct fm10k_tx_queue *txq)
 	 * next_dd - (rs_thresh-1)
 	 */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring[txq->next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0]);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -774,7 +774,7 @@ fm10k_tx_free_bufs(struct fm10k_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i]);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
index 374555896..76031fe2c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ i40e_tx_free_bufs(struct i40e_tx_queue *txq)
 	  * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
 	  */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring[txq->tx_next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool)) {
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ i40e_tx_free_bufs(struct i40e_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
index 52e5c9737..879e215f6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
@@ -142,7 +142,7 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 
 	for (i = 0; i < txq->tx_rs_thresh; ++i, ++txep) {
 		/* free buffers one at a time */
-		m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep->mbuf);
+		m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep->mbuf);
 		txep->mbuf = NULL;
 
 		if (unlikely(m == NULL))
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
index a3473b985..a83afe520 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 	 * tx_next_dd - (tx_rs_thresh-1)
 	 */
 	txep = &txq->sw_ring_v[txq->tx_next_dd - (n - 1)];
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[0].mbuf);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ ixgbe_tx_free_bufs(struct ixgbe_tx_queue *txq)
 		rte_mempool_put_bulk(free[0]->pool, (void **)free, nb_free);
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < n; i++) {
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(txep[i].mbuf);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
index b08f85948..f531c5428 100644
--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx_simple.h
@@ -98,13 +98,13 @@ virtio_xmit_cleanup(struct virtqueue *vq)
 	desc_idx = (uint16_t)(vq->vq_used_cons_idx &
 		   ((vq->vq_nentries >> 1) - 1));
 	m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-	m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		free[0] = m;
 		nb_free = 1;
 		for (i = 1; i < VIRTIO_TX_FREE_NR; i++) {
 			m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 			if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 				if (likely(m->pool == free[0]->pool))
 					free[nb_free++] = m;
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ virtio_xmit_cleanup(struct virtqueue *vq)
 	} else {
 		for (i = 1; i < VIRTIO_TX_FREE_NR; i++) {
 			m = (struct rte_mbuf *)vq->vq_descx[desc_idx++].cookie;
-			m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+			m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 			if (m != NULL)
 				rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 		}
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index fd5d32a2c..e15378567 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -1220,8 +1220,23 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
 }
 
-static inline struct rte_mbuf* __attribute__((always_inline))
-__rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+/**
+ * Decrease reference counter and unlink a mbuf segment
+ *
+ * This function does the same than a free, except that it does not
+ * return the segment to its pool.
+ * It decreases the reference counter, and if it reaches 0, it is
+ * detached from its parent for an indirect mbuf.
+ *
+ * @param m
+ *   The mbuf to be unlinked
+ * @return
+ *   - (m) if it is the last reference. It can be recycled or freed.
+ *   - (NULL) if the mbuf still has remaining references on it.
+ */
+__attribute__((always_inline))
+static inline struct rte_mbuf *
+rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
@@ -1234,6 +1249,14 @@ __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	return NULL;
 }
 
+/* deprecated, replaced by rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg() */
+__rte_deprecated
+static inline struct rte_mbuf *
+__rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+{
+	return rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+}
+
 /**
  * Free a segment of a packet mbuf into its original mempool.
  *
@@ -1246,7 +1269,8 @@ __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
-	if (likely(NULL != (m = __rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m)))) {
+	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
+	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		m->next = NULL;
 		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 	}
-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/8] mbuf: make raw free function public

[Olivier Matz]

Rename __rte_mbuf_raw_free() as rte_mbuf_raw_free() and make
it public. The old function is kept for compat but is marked as
deprecated.

The next commit changes the behavior of rte_mbuf_raw_free() to
make it more consistent with rte_mbuf_raw_alloc().

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c |  2 +-
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c |  6 +++---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h   | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
index b5e6db624..5dd44d778 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ena/ena_ethdev.c
@@ -680,7 +680,7 @@ static void ena_rx_queue_release_bufs(struct ena_ring *ring)
 			ring->rx_buffer_info[ring->next_to_clean & ring_mask];
 
 		if (m)
-			__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+			rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 
 		ring->next_to_clean++;
 	}
diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
index b8d2bf628..0cbf98ffd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
@@ -1475,7 +1475,7 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 				assert(pkt != (*rxq->elts)[idx]);
 				rep = NEXT(pkt);
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(pkt, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
 				pkt = rep;
 			}
 			break;
@@ -1486,13 +1486,13 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 					       &rss_hash_res);
 			if (!len) {
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				break;
 			}
 			if (unlikely(len == -1)) {
 				/* RX error, packet is likely too large. */
 				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
-				__rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
+				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				++rxq->stats.idropped;
 				goto skip;
 			}
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index e15378567..2dc4d8b98 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -797,20 +797,30 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 }
 
 /**
- * @internal Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
- * The use of that function is reserved for RTE internal needs.
- * Please use rte_pktmbuf_free().
+ * Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
+ *
+ * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and that the
+ * reference counter is 0.
  *
  * @param m
  *   The mbuf to be freed.
  */
 static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
-__rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
+	RTE_ASSERT(RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m));
 	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
 	rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 }
 
+/* compat with older versions */
+__rte_deprecated
+static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
+__rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
+{
+	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+}
+
 /* Operations on ctrl mbuf */
 
 /**
@@ -1217,7 +1227,7 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m->ol_flags = 0;
 
 	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1272,7 +1282,7 @@ rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
 	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
 		m->next = NULL;
-		__rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
+		rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
 	}
 }
 
-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/8] mbuf: set mbuf fields while in pool

[Olivier Matz]

Set the value of m->refcnt to 1, m->nb_segs to 1 and m->next
to NULL when the mbuf is stored inside the mempool (unused).
This is done in rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(), before freeing or
recycling a mbuf.

Before this patch, the value of m->refcnt was expected to be 0
while in pool.

The objectives are:

- to avoid drivers to set m->next to NULL in the early Rx path, since
  this field is in the second 64B of the mbuf and its access could
  trigger a cache miss

- rationalize the behavior of raw_alloc/raw_free: one is now the
  symmetric of the other, and refcnt is never changed in these functions.

To optimize the freeing of the segments, we try try to only update
m->refcnt, m->next, and m->nb_segs when it's required (idea from
Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>).

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c |  5 ++--
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c   |  2 ++
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h   | 60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
index 0cbf98ffd..e048b8d0e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c
@@ -1474,7 +1474,8 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 			while (pkt != seg) {
 				assert(pkt != (*rxq->elts)[idx]);
 				rep = NEXT(pkt);
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(pkt, 0);
+				NEXT(pkt) = NULL;
+				NB_SEGS(pkt) = 1;
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(pkt);
 				pkt = rep;
 			}
@@ -1485,13 +1486,11 @@ mlx5_rx_burst(void *dpdk_rxq, struct rte_mbuf **pkts, uint16_t pkts_n)
 			len = mlx5_rx_poll_len(rxq, cqe, cqe_cnt,
 					       &rss_hash_res);
 			if (!len) {
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				break;
 			}
 			if (unlikely(len == -1)) {
 				/* RX error, packet is likely too large. */
-				rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(rep, 0);
 				rte_mbuf_raw_free(rep);
 				++rxq->stats.idropped;
 				goto skip;
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
index 3fb2700ba..207bf3dd3 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
@@ -146,6 +146,8 @@ rte_pktmbuf_init(struct rte_mempool *mp,
 	m->pool = mp;
 	m->nb_segs = 1;
 	m->port = 0xff;
+	rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+	m->next = NULL;
 }
 
 /* helper to create a mbuf pool */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 2dc4d8b98..1efebec7c 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -775,6 +775,11 @@ rte_mbuf_sanity_check(const struct rte_mbuf *m, int is_header);
  * initializing all the required fields. See rte_pktmbuf_reset().
  * For standard needs, prefer rte_pktmbuf_alloc().
  *
+ * The caller can expect that the following fields of the mbuf structure
+ * are initialized: buf_addr, buf_physaddr, buf_len, refcnt=1, nb_segs=1,
+ * next=NULL, pool, priv_size. The other fields must be initialized
+ * by the caller.
+ *
  * @param mp
  *   The mempool from which mbuf is allocated.
  * @return
@@ -789,8 +794,9 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 	if (rte_mempool_get(mp, &mb) < 0)
 		return NULL;
 	m = (struct rte_mbuf *)mb;
-	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
-	rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->next == NULL);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->nb_segs == 1);
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
 	return m;
@@ -799,8 +805,13 @@ static inline struct rte_mbuf *rte_mbuf_raw_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
 /**
  * Put mbuf back into its original mempool.
  *
- * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and that the
- * reference counter is 0.
+ * The caller must ensure that the mbuf is direct and properly
+ * reinitialized (refcnt=1, next=NULL, nb_segs=1), as done by
+ * rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg().
+ *
+ * This function should be used with care, when optimization is
+ * required. For standard needs, prefer rte_pktmbuf_free() or
+ * rte_pktmbuf_free_seg().
  *
  * @param m
  *   The mbuf to be freed.
@@ -809,13 +820,16 @@ static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	RTE_ASSERT(RTE_MBUF_DIRECT(m));
-	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 0);
+	RTE_ASSERT(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->next == NULL);
+	RTE_ASSERT(m->nb_segs == 1);
+	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 	rte_mempool_put(m->pool, m);
 }
 
 /* compat with older versions */
 __rte_deprecated
-static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
+static inline void
 __rte_mbuf_raw_free(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
@@ -1226,8 +1240,12 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_detach(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	m->data_len = 0;
 	m->ol_flags = 0;
 
-	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0)
+	if (rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(md, -1) == 0) {
+		md->next = NULL;
+		md->nb_segs = 1;
+		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(md, 1);
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(md);
+	}
 }
 
 /**
@@ -1250,10 +1268,30 @@ rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
 
-	if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(m, -1) == 0)) {
-		/* if this is an indirect mbuf, it is detached. */
+	if (likely(rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(m) == 1)) {
+
 		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
 			rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
+
+		if (m->next != NULL) {
+			m->next = NULL;
+			m->nb_segs = 1;
+		}
+
+		return m;
+
+       } else if (rte_atomic16_add_return(&m->refcnt_atomic, -1) == 0) {
+
+
+		if (RTE_MBUF_INDIRECT(m))
+			rte_pktmbuf_detach(m);
+
+		if (m->next != NULL) {
+			m->next = NULL;
+			m->nb_segs = 1;
+		}
+		rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(m, 1);
+
 		return m;
 	}
 	return NULL;
@@ -1280,10 +1318,8 @@ static inline void __attribute__((always_inline))
 rte_pktmbuf_free_seg(struct rte_mbuf *m)
 {
 	m = rte_pktmbuf_prefree_seg(m);
-	if (likely(m != NULL)) {
-		m->next = NULL;
+	if (likely(m != NULL))
 		rte_mbuf_raw_free(m);
-	}
 }
 
 /**
-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/8] drivers/net: don't touch mbuf next or nb segs on Rx

[Olivier Matz]

Now that the m->next pointer and m->nb_segs is expected to be set (to
NULL and 1 respectively) after a mempool_get(), we can avoid to write them
in the Rx functions of drivers.

Only some drivers are patched, it's not an exhaustive patch. It gives
the idea to do the same in other drivers.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 6 ------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c          | 8 --------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c | 6 ------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c  | 6 ------
 drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c         | 2 --
 drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c        | 4 ----
 6 files changed, 32 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index b95cc8e19..2f861fde8 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -424,12 +424,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct i40e_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			/* store the resulting 32-bit value */
 			*(int *)split_packet = _mm_cvtsi128_si32(eop_bits);
 			split_packet += RTE_I40E_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		/* C.3 calc available number of desc */
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
index 879e215f6..5023617a2 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx.c
@@ -1556,8 +1556,6 @@ ixgbe_rx_alloc_bufs(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, bool reset_mbuf)
 		/* populate the static rte mbuf fields */
 		mb = rxep[i].mbuf;
 		if (reset_mbuf) {
-			mb->next = NULL;
-			mb->nb_segs = 1;
 			mb->port = rxq->port_id;
 		}
 
@@ -2165,12 +2163,6 @@ ixgbe_recv_pkts_lro(void *rx_queue, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts, uint16_t nb_pkts,
 			goto next_desc;
 		}
 
-		/*
-		 * This is the last buffer of the received packet - return
-		 * the current cluster to the user.
-		 */
-		rxm->next = NULL;
-
 		/* Initialize the first mbuf of the returned packet */
 		ixgbe_fill_cluster_head_buf(first_seg, &rxd, rxq, staterr);
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index e2715cb96..2c0416179 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -330,12 +330,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			*(int *)split_packet = ~stat & IXGBE_VPMD_DESC_EOP_MASK;
 
 			split_packet += RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		rte_prefetch_non_temporal(rxdp + RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP);
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index abbf2841f..65c5da3c7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -425,12 +425,6 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 			/* store the resulting 32-bit value */
 			*(int *)split_packet = _mm_cvtsi128_si32(eop_bits);
 			split_packet += RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP;
-
-			/* zero-out next pointers */
-			rx_pkts[pos]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 1]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 2]->next = NULL;
-			rx_pkts[pos + 3]->next = NULL;
 		}
 
 		/* C.3 calc available number of desc */
diff --git a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
index 57203e2ed..7e14da0e0 100644
--- a/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
+++ b/drivers/net/null/rte_eth_null.c
@@ -112,8 +112,6 @@ eth_null_rx(void *q, struct rte_mbuf **bufs, uint16_t nb_bufs)
 			break;
 		bufs[i]->data_len = (uint16_t)packet_size;
 		bufs[i]->pkt_len = packet_size;
-		bufs[i]->nb_segs = 1;
-		bufs[i]->next = NULL;
 		bufs[i]->port = h->internals->port_id;
 	}
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
index cab6e8fc0..b3e6d8027 100644
--- a/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/virtio/virtio_rxtx.c
@@ -772,8 +772,6 @@ virtio_recv_pkts(void *rx_queue, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts, uint16_t nb_pkts)
 		rxm->ol_flags = 0;
 		rxm->vlan_tci = 0;
 
-		rxm->nb_segs = 1;
-		rxm->next = NULL;
 		rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[i] - hdr_size);
 		rxm->data_len = (uint16_t)(len[i] - hdr_size);
 
@@ -900,7 +898,6 @@ virtio_recv_mergeable_pkts(void *rx_queue,
 
 		rxm->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;
 		rxm->nb_segs = seg_num;
-		rxm->next = NULL;
 		rxm->ol_flags = 0;
 		rxm->vlan_tci = 0;
 		rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[0] - hdr_size);
@@ -945,7 +942,6 @@ virtio_recv_mergeable_pkts(void *rx_queue,
 				rxm = rcv_pkts[extra_idx];
 
 				rxm->data_off = RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM - hdr_size;
-				rxm->next = NULL;
 				rxm->pkt_len = (uint32_t)(len[extra_idx]);
 				rxm->data_len = (uint16_t)(len[extra_idx]);
 
-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 5/8] mbuf: make rearm data address naturally aligned

[Olivier Matz]

From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>

To avoid multiple stores on fast path, Ethernet drivers
aggregate the writes to data_off, refcnt, nb_segs and port
to an uint64_t data and write the data in one shot
with uint64_t* at &mbuf->rearm_data address.

Some of the non-IA platforms have store operation overhead
if the store address is not naturally aligned.This patch
fixes the performance issue on those targets.

Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c                            | 3 ---
 drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c                          | 5 +----
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c                       | 3 ---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c                        | 3 ---
 lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h | 3 +--
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                                    | 6 +++---
 6 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
index 825e3c125..61a65e9bf 100644
--- a/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
+++ b/drivers/net/fm10k/fm10k_rxtx_vec.c
@@ -324,9 +324,6 @@ fm10k_rxq_rearm(struct fm10k_rx_queue *rxq)
 
 		/* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 2f861fde8..e17235abf 100644
--- a/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/i40e/i40e_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -87,11 +87,8 @@ i40e_rxq_rearm(struct i40e_rx_queue *rxq)
 		mb0 = rxep[0].mbuf;
 		mb1 = rxep[1].mbuf;
 
-		 /* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
+		/* Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index 2c0416179..bc8924fbb 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -85,9 +85,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		/*
 		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		vst1_u8((uint8_t *)&mb0->rearm_data, p);
 		paddr = mb0->buf_physaddr + RTE_PKTMBUF_HEADROOM;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 65c5da3c7..62afe3100 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -90,9 +90,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		/*
 		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
 		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 * Though, RX will overwrite ol_flags that are coming next
-		 * anyway. So overwrite whole 8 bytes with one load:
-		 * 6 bytes of rearm_data plus first 2 bytes of ol_flags.
 		 */
 		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
 		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
index 09713b0c2..f24f79fa2 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
@@ -116,11 +116,10 @@ struct rte_kni_fifo {
 struct rte_kni_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr __attribute__((__aligned__(RTE_CACHE_LINE_SIZE)));
 	uint64_t buf_physaddr;
-	char pad0[2];
 	uint16_t data_off;      /**< Start address of data in segment buffer. */
 	char pad1[2];
 	uint8_t nb_segs;        /**< Number of segments. */
-	char pad4[1];
+	char pad4[3];
 	uint64_t ol_flags;      /**< Offload features. */
 	char pad2[4];
 	uint32_t pkt_len;       /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segment data_len. */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 1efebec7c..4ef27f92a 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -400,10 +400,8 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr;           /**< Virtual address of segment buffer. */
 	phys_addr_t buf_physaddr; /**< Physical address of segment buffer. */
 
-	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
-
 	/* next 6 bytes are initialised on RX descriptor rearm */
-	MARKER8 rearm_data;
+	MARKER64 rearm_data;
 	uint16_t data_off;
 
 	/**
@@ -421,6 +419,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	};
 	uint8_t nb_segs;          /**< Number of segments. */
 	uint8_t port;             /**< Input port. */
+	uint16_t pad;             /**< 2B pad for naturally aligned ol_flags */
 
 	uint64_t ol_flags;        /**< Offload features. */
 
@@ -481,6 +480,7 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
+	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
 	/* second cache line - fields only used in slow path or on TX */
 	MARKER cacheline1 __rte_cache_min_aligned;
 
-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Olivier Matz]

Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits. It is now possible
to reference a port identifier larger than 256 and have a mbuf chain
larger than 256 segments.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 app/test-pmd/csumonly.c                                      |  4 ++--
 .../linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h           |  4 ++--
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h                                   | 12 +++++++-----
 3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
index 88cc84205..5eaff9b2f 100644
--- a/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
+++ b/app/test-pmd/csumonly.c
@@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ pkt_copy_split(const struct rte_mbuf *pkt)
 		rc = mbuf_copy_split(pkt, md, seglen, nb_seg);
 		if (rc < 0)
 			RTE_LOG(ERR, USER1,
-				"mbuf_copy_split for %p(len=%u, nb_seg=%hhu) "
+				"mbuf_copy_split for %p(len=%u, nb_seg=%u) "
 				"into %u segments failed with error code: %d\n",
 				pkt, pkt->pkt_len, pkt->nb_segs, nb_seg, rc);
 
@@ -801,7 +801,7 @@ pkt_burst_checksum_forward(struct fwd_stream *fs)
 			char buf[256];
 
 			printf("-----------------\n");
-			printf("port=%u, mbuf=%p, pkt_len=%u, nb_segs=%hhu:\n",
+			printf("port=%u, mbuf=%p, pkt_len=%u, nb_segs=%u:\n",
 				fs->rx_port, m, m->pkt_len, m->nb_segs);
 			/* dump rx parsed packet info */
 			rte_get_rx_ol_flag_list(rx_ol_flags, buf, sizeof(buf));
diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
index f24f79fa2..2ac879fdd 100644
--- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
+++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/include/exec-env/rte_kni_common.h
@@ -118,8 +118,8 @@ struct rte_kni_mbuf {
 	uint64_t buf_physaddr;
 	uint16_t data_off;      /**< Start address of data in segment buffer. */
 	char pad1[2];
-	uint8_t nb_segs;        /**< Number of segments. */
-	char pad4[3];
+	uint16_t nb_segs;       /**< Number of segments. */
+	char pad4[2];
 	uint64_t ol_flags;      /**< Offload features. */
 	char pad2[4];
 	uint32_t pkt_len;       /**< Total pkt len: sum of all segment data_len. */
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 4ef27f92a..323a1ac16 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -400,12 +400,13 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	void *buf_addr;           /**< Virtual address of segment buffer. */
 	phys_addr_t buf_physaddr; /**< Physical address of segment buffer. */
 
-	/* next 6 bytes are initialised on RX descriptor rearm */
+	/* next 8 bytes are initialised on RX descriptor rearm */
 	MARKER64 rearm_data;
 	uint16_t data_off;
 
 	/**
-	 * 16-bit Reference counter.
+	 * Reference counter. Its size should at least equal to the size
+	 * of port field (16 bits), to support zero-copy broadcast.
 	 * It should only be accessed using the following functions:
 	 * rte_mbuf_refcnt_update(), rte_mbuf_refcnt_read(), and
 	 * rte_mbuf_refcnt_set(). The functionality of these functions (atomic,
@@ -417,9 +418,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 		rte_atomic16_t refcnt_atomic; /**< Atomically accessed refcnt */
 		uint16_t refcnt;              /**< Non-atomically accessed refcnt */
 	};
-	uint8_t nb_segs;          /**< Number of segments. */
-	uint8_t port;             /**< Input port. */
-	uint16_t pad;             /**< 2B pad for naturally aligned ol_flags */
+	uint16_t nb_segs;         /**< Number of segments. */
+
+	/** Input port (16 bits to support more than 256 virtual ports). */
+	uint16_t port;
 
 	uint64_t ol_flags;        /**< Offload features. */
 
-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 7/8] mbuf: move sequence number in second cache line

[Olivier Matz]

Move this field in the second cache line, since no driver use it
in Rx path. The freed space will be used by a timestamp in next
commit.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 6 ++++--
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 323a1ac16..349f0512e 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -477,8 +477,6 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 		uint32_t usr;	  /**< User defined tags. See rte_distributor_process() */
 	} hash;                   /**< hash information */
 
-	uint32_t seqn; /**< Sequence number. See also rte_reorder_insert() */
-
 	/** Outer VLAN TCI (CPU order), valid if PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED is set. */
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
@@ -523,6 +521,10 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 
 	/** Timesync flags for use with IEEE1588. */
 	uint16_t timesync;
+
+	/** Sequence number. See also rte_reorder_insert(). */
+	uint32_t seqn;
+
 } __rte_cache_aligned;
 
 /**
-- 
2.11.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 8/8] mbuf: add a timestamp field

[Olivier Matz]

The field itself is not fully described yet, but this commit reserves
the room in the mbuf.

Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
---
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c |  2 ++
 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 12 ++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+)

diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
index 207bf3dd3..0e3e36a58 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.c
@@ -323,6 +323,7 @@ const char *rte_get_rx_ol_flag_name(uint64_t mask)
 	case PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST: return "PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST";
 	case PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED: return "PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED";
 	case PKT_RX_LRO: return "PKT_RX_LRO";
+	case PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP: return "PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP";
 	default: return NULL;
 	}
 }
@@ -357,6 +358,7 @@ rte_get_rx_ol_flag_list(uint64_t mask, char *buf, size_t buflen)
 		{ PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST, PKT_RX_IEEE1588_TMST, NULL },
 		{ PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED, PKT_RX_QINQ_STRIPPED, NULL },
 		{ PKT_RX_LRO, PKT_RX_LRO, NULL },
+		{ PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP, PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP, NULL },
 	};
 	const char *name;
 	unsigned int i;
diff --git a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
index 349f0512e..9dd8e807e 100644
--- a/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
+++ b/lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h
@@ -184,6 +184,11 @@ extern "C" {
  */
 #define PKT_RX_LRO           (1ULL << 16)
 
+/**
+ * Indicate that the timestamp field in the mbuf is valid.
+ */
+#define PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP     (1ULL << 17)
+
 /* add new RX flags here */
 
 /* add new TX flags here */
@@ -481,6 +486,12 @@ struct rte_mbuf {
 	uint16_t vlan_tci_outer;
 
 	uint16_t buf_len;         /**< Length of segment buffer. */
+
+	/** Valid if PKT_RX_TIMESTAMP is set. The unit and time reference
+	 * are not normalized but are always the same for a given port.
+	 */
+	uint64_t timestamp;
+
 	/* second cache line - fields only used in slow path or on TX */
 	MARKER cacheline1 __rte_cache_min_aligned;
 
@@ -1208,6 +1219,7 @@ static inline void rte_pktmbuf_attach(struct rte_mbuf *mi, struct rte_mbuf *m)
 	mi->nb_segs = 1;
 	mi->ol_flags = m->ol_flags | IND_ATTACHED_MBUF;
 	mi->packet_type = m->packet_type;
+	mi->timestamp = m->timestamp;
 
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(mi, 1);
 	__rte_mbuf_sanity_check(m, 0);
-- 
2.11.0

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Thomas Monjalon]

2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
> Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> the mbuf.
> 
> The main changes are:
> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>   platforms.
> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
>   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
>   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line

Applied, thanks for the long work

We need to add a patch to bump ABIVER and document the changes.


> Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
>   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
>   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.

If it is worth to move these fields in 2nd cache line,
can we plan to rework drivers for not setting them in Rx?

> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> idea of what could be done.

Yes drivers patches are welcome :)
Please target RC2 for these changes.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

On Wed, 05 Apr 2017 11:37:39 +0200, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
> > Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> > the mbuf.
> > 
> > The main changes are:
> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >   platforms.
> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
> >   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
> >   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
> >   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
> >   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line  
> 
> Applied, thanks for the long work
> 
> We need to add a patch to bump ABIVER and document the changes.

Thanks Thomas. I'm on it, I will send it ASAP.

> > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
> >   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression, or
> >   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.  
> 
> If it is worth to move these fields in 2nd cache line,
> can we plan to rework drivers for not setting them in Rx?

I think it's worth doing the driver modification, it may gain some
cycles. Once it's done, it becomes easy to see the impact of moving the
fields... except if it breaks a vector code ;)

I think this move should only occur if we need more room in the first
cache line.

> 
> > Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> > by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> > idea of what could be done.  
> 
> Yes drivers patches are welcome :)
> Please target RC2 for these changes.
> 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Richardson, Bruce]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2017 10:38 AM
> To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>;
> Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; mb@smartsharesystems.com;
> Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; jblunck@infradead.org;
> nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization
> 
> 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
> > Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset
> > reorganizes the mbuf.
> >
> > The main changes are:
> > - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >   platforms.
> > - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
> >   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
> >   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> > - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
> >   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
> >   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> > - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> > - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Applied, thanks for the long work
> 
+1

> We need to add a patch to bump ABIVER and document the changes.
> 
> 
> > Things discussed but not done in the patchset:
> > - move refcnt and nb_segs to the 2nd cache line: many drivers sets
> >   them in the Rx path, so it could introduce a performance regression,
> or
> >   it would require to change all the drivers, which is not an easy task.
> 
> If it is worth to move these fields in 2nd cache line, can we plan to
> rework drivers for not setting them in Rx?

Any drivers that are already setting these fields directly may get a perf bump by not doing so. However, I'm not sure there is a compelling need to move them down just yet. Let's try and avoid breaking the mbuf again for a few releases.

> 
> > Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be
> > optimized a bit, by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and
> > m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an idea of what could be done.
> 
> Yes drivers patches are welcome :)
> Please target RC2 for these changes.

We indeed plan to do so!

/Bruce

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 4/5/2017 10:37 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
>> Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
>> the mbuf.
>>
>> The main changes are:
>> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>>   platforms.
>> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
>>   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
>>   library may be added to do this job in the future.
>> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
>> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
>> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Applied, thanks for the long work

Hi Nelio, Adrien,

After this patch, mlx5 with debug enabled giving following build error
[1] with gcc, not really sure about reason of the error, can you please
check?

[1]
.../drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c: In function ‘mlx5_rx_burst’:
.../drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c:2082:17: error: ‘len’ may be used
uninitialized in this function [-Werror=maybe-uninitialized]
   DATA_LEN(seg) = len;

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Yuanhan Liu]

Hi Olivier,

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.

But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't really
take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?

	--yliu

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] reduce writes to mbuf in ixgbe vRX

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 4/4/2017 11:29 AM, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
> Pretty much the same as one from Bruce:
> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-April/062936.html
> but now for ixgbe.
> Based on Olivier's mbuf rework patchset, and makes some
> improvement to the ixgbe driver taking account of the rework.
> It also removes a build-time option that seems unnecessary.
> 
> Depends on: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/059693.html
> 
> Konstantin Ananyev (2):
>   net/ixgbe: eliminate mbuf write on rearm
>   net/ixgbe: remove option to disable offload flags
> 
>  config/common_base                        |  1 -
>  doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst                 | 18 ----------
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  7 ----
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c   | 11 ------
>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 58 +++++++++++++------------------
>  5 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)

Series applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] reduce writes to mbuf in ixgbe vRX

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 4/7/2017 4:13 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 4/4/2017 11:29 AM, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
>> Pretty much the same as one from Bruce:
>> http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-April/062936.html
>> but now for ixgbe.
>> Based on Olivier's mbuf rework patchset, and makes some
>> improvement to the ixgbe driver taking account of the rework.
>> It also removes a build-time option that seems unnecessary.
>>
>> Depends on: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2017-March/059693.html
>>
>> Konstantin Ananyev (2):
>>   net/ixgbe: eliminate mbuf write on rearm
>>   net/ixgbe: remove option to disable offload flags
>>
>>  config/common_base                        |  1 -
>>  doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst                 | 18 ----------
>>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  7 ----
>>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c   | 11 ------
>>  drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 58 +++++++++++++------------------
>>  5 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)
> 
> Series applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.

Hi Konstantin,

I talked a little early, getting following build error [1] with
"default" machine type. Patches dropped from tree for now.

[1]
...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:217:11: error: implicit
declaration of function '_mm_blend_epi16' is invalid in C99
[-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
        rearm0 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 8), 0x10);
                 ^
...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:217:9: error: assigning to
'__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
        rearm0 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 8), 0x10);
               ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:218:9: error: assigning to
'__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
        rearm1 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 6), 0x10);
               ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:219:9: error: assigning to
'__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
        rearm2 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 4), 0x10);
               ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:220:9: error: assigning to
'__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
        rearm3 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 2), 0x10);
               ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] reduce writes to mbuf in ixgbe vRX

[Ananyev, Konstantin]

Hi Ferruh,

> 
> Hi Konstantin,
> 
> I talked a little early, getting following build error [1] with
> "default" machine type. Patches dropped from tree for now.

My bad, forgot to check with 'default'
Thanks for flagging that, will update and resend v2.
Konstantin 

> 
> [1]
> ...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:217:11: error: implicit
> declaration of function '_mm_blend_epi16' is invalid in C99
> [-Werror,-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
>         rearm0 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 8), 0x10);
>                  ^
> ...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:217:9: error: assigning to
> '__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
>         rearm0 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 8), 0x10);
>                ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:218:9: error: assigning to
> '__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
>         rearm1 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 6), 0x10);
>                ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:219:9: error: assigning to
> '__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
>         rearm2 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 4), 0x10);
>                ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ...drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c:220:9: error: assigning to
> '__m128i' (vector of 2 'long long' values) from incompatible type 'int'
>         rearm3 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 2), 0x10);
>                ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> 

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] reduce writes to mbuf in ixgbe vRX

[Konstantin Ananyev]

Based on Olivier's mbuf rework patchset, and makes some
improvement to the ixgbe driver taking account of the rework.
It also removes a build-time option that seems unnecessary.

changes in v2:
Fix build error for "default" cpu.
Fix build error when CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=n

Konstantin Ananyev (2):
  net/ixgbe: eliminate mbuf write on rearm
  net/ixgbe: remove option to disable offload flags

 config/common_base                        |  1 -
 doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst                 | 18 --------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  7 ---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c   | 11 -----
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 73 +++++++++++++++++--------------
 5 files changed, 39 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-)

-- 
2.5.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] net/ixgbe: eliminate mbuf write on rearm

[Konstantin Ananyev]

With the mbuf rework, we now have 8 contiguous bytes to be rearmed in the
mbuf just before the 8-bytes of olflags. If we don't do the rearm write
inside the descriptor ring replenishment function, and delay it to
receiving the packet, we can do a single 16B write inside the RX function
to set both the rearm data, and the flags together.

Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
---
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 62afe31..8e19b9d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -82,19 +82,23 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 	/* Initialize the mbufs in vector, process 2 mbufs in one loop */
 	for (i = 0; i < RTE_IXGBE_RXQ_REARM_THRESH; i += 2, rxep += 2) {
 		__m128i vaddr0, vaddr1;
-		uintptr_t p0, p1;
 
 		mb0 = rxep[0].mbuf;
 		mb1 = rxep[1].mbuf;
 
-		/*
-		 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
-		 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-		 */
-		p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
-		*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
-		p1 = (uintptr_t)&mb1->rearm_data;
-		*(uint64_t *)p1 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
+#ifndef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
+		{
+			uintptr_t p0, p1;
+			/*
+			 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
+			 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
+			 */
+			p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
+			*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
+			p1 = (uintptr_t)&mb1->rearm_data;
+			*(uint64_t *)p1 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
+		}
+#endif
 
 		/* load buf_addr(lo 64bit) and buf_physaddr(hi 64bit) */
 		vaddr0 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i *)&(mb0->buf_addr));
@@ -139,14 +143,11 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 #ifdef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
 
 static inline void
-desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], uint8_t vlan_flags,
+desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], __m128i mbuf_init, uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts)
 {
 	__m128i ptype0, ptype1, vtag0, vtag1, csum;
-	union {
-		uint16_t e[4];
-		uint64_t dword;
-	} vol;
+	__m128i rearm0, rearm1, rearm2, rearm3;
 
 	/* mask everything except rss type */
 	const __m128i rsstype_msk = _mm_set_epi16(
@@ -225,12 +226,40 @@ desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	vtag1 = _mm_or_si128(vtag0, vtag1);
 
 	vtag1 = _mm_or_si128(ptype0, vtag1);
-	vol.dword = _mm_cvtsi128_si64(vtag1);
 
-	rx_pkts[0]->ol_flags = vol.e[0];
-	rx_pkts[1]->ol_flags = vol.e[1];
-	rx_pkts[2]->ol_flags = vol.e[2];
-	rx_pkts[3]->ol_flags = vol.e[3];
+	/*
+	 * At this point, we have the 4 sets of flags in the low 64-bits
+	 * of vtag1 (4x16).
+	 * We want to extract these, and merge them with the mbuf init data
+	 * so we can do a single 16-byte write to the mbuf to set the flags
+	 * and all the other initialization fields. Extracting the
+	 * appropriate flags means that we have to do a shift and blend for
+	 * each mbuf before we do the write.
+	 */
+#ifdef RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSE4_2
+
+	rearm0 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 8), 0x10);
+	rearm1 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 6), 0x10);
+	rearm2 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 4), 0x10);
+	rearm3 = _mm_blend_epi16(mbuf_init, _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 2), 0x10);
+
+#else
+	rearm0 = _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 14);
+	rearm1 = _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 12);
+	rearm2 = _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 10);
+	rearm3 = _mm_slli_si128(vtag1, 8);
+
+	rearm0 = _mm_or_si128(mbuf_init, _mm_srli_epi64(rearm0, 48));
+	rearm1 = _mm_or_si128(mbuf_init, _mm_srli_epi64(rearm1, 48));
+	rearm2 = _mm_or_si128(mbuf_init, _mm_srli_epi64(rearm2, 48));
+	rearm3 = _mm_or_si128(mbuf_init, _mm_srli_epi64(rearm3, 48));
+
+#endif /* RTE_MACHINE_CPUFLAG_SSE4_2 */
+
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[0]->rearm_data, rearm0);
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[1]->rearm_data, rearm1);
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[2]->rearm_data, rearm2);
+	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[3]->rearm_data, rearm3);
 }
 #else
 #define desc_to_olflags_v(desc, vlan_flags, rx_pkts) do { \
@@ -265,6 +294,7 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 				0, 0            /* ignore pkt_type field */
 			);
 	__m128i dd_check, eop_check;
+	__m128i mbuf_init;
 	uint8_t vlan_flags;
 
 	/* nb_pkts shall be less equal than RTE_IXGBE_MAX_RX_BURST */
@@ -310,6 +340,8 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 		0xFF, 0xFF
 		);
 
+	mbuf_init = _mm_set_epi64x(0, rxq->mbuf_initializer);
+
 	/* Cache is empty -> need to scan the buffer rings, but first move
 	 * the next 'n' mbufs into the cache
 	 */
@@ -382,7 +414,7 @@ _recv_raw_pkts_vec(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq, struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts,
 		sterr_tmp1 = _mm_unpackhi_epi32(descs[1], descs[0]);
 
 		/* set ol_flags with vlan packet type */
-		desc_to_olflags_v(descs, vlan_flags, &rx_pkts[pos]);
+		desc_to_olflags_v(descs, mbuf_init, vlan_flags, &rx_pkts[pos]);
 
 		/* D.2 pkt 3,4 set in_port/nb_seg and remove crc */
 		pkt_mb4 = _mm_add_epi16(pkt_mb4, crc_adjust);
-- 
2.5.0

[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] net/ixgbe: remove option to disable offload flags

[Konstantin Ananyev]

Having packets received without any offload flags given in the mbuf is not
very useful, and performance tests with testpmd indicates little
benefit is got with the current code by turning off the flags. This makes
the build-time option pointless, so we can remove it.

Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
---
 config/common_base                        |  1 -
 doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst                 | 18 ------------------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h |  7 -------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c   | 11 -----------
 drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c    | 27 ---------------------------
 5 files changed, 64 deletions(-)

diff --git a/config/common_base b/config/common_base
index fc75c63..8d9560f 100644
--- a/config/common_base
+++ b/config/common_base
@@ -173,7 +173,6 @@ CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_DEBUG_TX_FREE=n
 CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_DEBUG_DRIVER=n
 CONFIG_RTE_LIBRTE_IXGBE_PF_DISABLE_STRIP_CRC=n
 CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_INC_VECTOR=y
-CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=y
 
 #
 # Compile burst-oriented I40E PMD driver
diff --git a/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst b/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst
index 1a4aa48..130765b 100644
--- a/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/nics/ixgbe.rst
@@ -95,9 +95,6 @@ Other features are supported using optional MACRO configuration. They include:
 
 *   HW extend dual VLAN
 
-*   Enabled by RX_OLFLAGS (RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=y)
-
-
 To guarantee the constraint, configuration flags in dev_conf.rxmode will be checked:
 
 *   hw_vlan_strip
@@ -156,21 +153,6 @@ The declarations for the API functions are in the header ``rte_pmd_ixgbe.h``.
 Sample Application Notes
 ------------------------
 
-testpmd
-~~~~~~~
-
-By default, using CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=y:
-
-.. code-block:: console
-
-    ./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd -l 8-9 -n 4 -- -i --burst=32 --rxfreet=32 --mbcache=250 --txpt=32 --rxht=8 --rxwt=0 --txfreet=32 --txrst=32 --txqflags=0xf01
-
-When CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=n, better performance can be achieved:
-
-.. code-block:: console
-
-    ./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/testpmd -l 8-9 -n 4 -- -i --burst=32 --rxfreet=32 --mbcache=250 --txpt=32 --rxht=8 --rxwt=0 --txfreet=32 --txrst=32 --txqflags=0xf01 --disable-hw-vlan
-
 l3fwd
 ~~~~~
 
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
index a83afe5..1c34bb5 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_common.h
@@ -310,13 +310,6 @@ ixgbe_rx_vec_dev_conf_condition_check_default(struct rte_eth_dev *dev)
 	struct rte_eth_rxmode *rxmode = &dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode;
 	struct rte_fdir_conf *fconf = &dev->data->dev_conf.fdir_conf;
 
-#ifndef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-	/* whithout rx ol_flags, no VP flag report */
-	if (rxmode->hw_vlan_strip != 0 ||
-	    rxmode->hw_vlan_extend != 0)
-		return -1;
-#endif
-
 	/* no fdir support */
 	if (fconf->mode != RTE_FDIR_MODE_NONE)
 		return -1;
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
index bc8924f..517b8c7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_neon.c
@@ -111,14 +111,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 	IXGBE_PCI_REG_WRITE(rxq->rdt_reg_addr, rx_id);
 }
 
-/* Handling the offload flags (olflags) field takes computation
- * time when receiving packets. Therefore we provide a flag to disable
- * the processing of the olflags field when they are not needed. This
- * gives improved performance, at the cost of losing the offload info
- * in the received packet
- */
-#ifdef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-
 #define VTAG_SHIFT     (3)
 
 static inline void
@@ -167,9 +159,6 @@ desc_to_olflags_v(uint8x16x2_t sterr_tmp1, uint8x16x2_t sterr_tmp2,
 	rx_pkts[2]->ol_flags = vol.e[2];
 	rx_pkts[3]->ol_flags = vol.e[3];
 }
-#else
-#define desc_to_olflags_v(sterr_tmp1, sterr_tmp2, staterr, rx_pkts)
-#endif
 
 /*
  * vPMD raw receive routine, only accept(nb_pkts >= RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
index 8e19b9d..e091e7d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ixgbe/ixgbe_rxtx_vec_sse.c
@@ -86,20 +86,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 		mb0 = rxep[0].mbuf;
 		mb1 = rxep[1].mbuf;
 
-#ifndef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-		{
-			uintptr_t p0, p1;
-			/*
-			 * Flush mbuf with pkt template.
-			 * Data to be rearmed is 6 bytes long.
-			 */
-			p0 = (uintptr_t)&mb0->rearm_data;
-			*(uint64_t *)p0 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
-			p1 = (uintptr_t)&mb1->rearm_data;
-			*(uint64_t *)p1 = rxq->mbuf_initializer;
-		}
-#endif
-
 		/* load buf_addr(lo 64bit) and buf_physaddr(hi 64bit) */
 		vaddr0 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i *)&(mb0->buf_addr));
 		vaddr1 = _mm_loadu_si128((__m128i *)&(mb1->buf_addr));
@@ -134,14 +120,6 @@ ixgbe_rxq_rearm(struct ixgbe_rx_queue *rxq)
 	IXGBE_PCI_REG_WRITE(rxq->rdt_reg_addr, rx_id);
 }
 
-/* Handling the offload flags (olflags) field takes computation
- * time when receiving packets. Therefore we provide a flag to disable
- * the processing of the olflags field when they are not needed. This
- * gives improved performance, at the cost of losing the offload info
- * in the received packet
- */
-#ifdef RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE
-
 static inline void
 desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], __m128i mbuf_init, uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	struct rte_mbuf **rx_pkts)
@@ -261,11 +239,6 @@ desc_to_olflags_v(__m128i descs[4], __m128i mbuf_init, uint8_t vlan_flags,
 	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[2]->rearm_data, rearm2);
 	_mm_store_si128((__m128i *)&rx_pkts[3]->rearm_data, rearm3);
 }
-#else
-#define desc_to_olflags_v(desc, vlan_flags, rx_pkts) do { \
-		RTE_SET_USED(vlan_flags); \
-	} while (0)
-#endif
 
 /*
  * vPMD raw receive routine, only accept(nb_pkts >= RTE_IXGBE_DESCS_PER_LOOP)
-- 
2.5.0

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] reduce writes to mbuf in ixgbe vRX

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 4/10/2017 4:59 PM, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
> Based on Olivier's mbuf rework patchset, and makes some
> improvement to the ixgbe driver taking account of the rework.
> It also removes a build-time option that seems unnecessary.
> 
> changes in v2:
> Fix build error for "default" cpu.
> Fix build error when CONFIG_RTE_IXGBE_RX_OLFLAGS_ENABLE=n
> 
> Konstantin Ananyev (2):
>   net/ixgbe: eliminate mbuf write on rearm
>   net/ixgbe: remove option to disable offload flags

Series applied to dpdk-next-net/master, thanks.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 4/5/2017 10:37 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
>> Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
>> the mbuf.
>>
>> The main changes are:
>> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
>>   platforms.
>> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
>>   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
>>   library may be added to do this job in the future.
>> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
>>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
>>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
>> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
>> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line
> 
> Applied, thanks for the long work
> 

<...>

>> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
>> by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
>> idea of what could be done.

Hi Olivier,

Some driver patches already received for this update, but not all yet.

Can you please describe what changes are required in PMDs after this
patch? And what will be effect of doing changes or not?

Later we can circulate this information through the PMD maintainers to
be sure proper updates done.

Thanks,
ferruh

> 
> Yes drivers patches are welcome :)
> Please target RC2 for these changes.
> 

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Yuanhan,

On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.  
> 
> But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't really
> take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?
> 
> 	--yliu

Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to
make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type for
a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could be a
first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).

I'll do the change and send a rfc.

Regards,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

Hi Ferruh,

On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 14:10:33 +0100, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> On 4/5/2017 10:37 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:  
> >> Based on discussions done in [1] and in this thread, this patchset reorganizes
> >> the mbuf.
> >>
> >> The main changes are:
> >> - reorder structure to increase vector performance on some non-ia
> >>   platforms.!
> >> - add a 64bits timestamp field in the 1st cache line. This timestamp
> >>   is not normalized, i.e. no unit or time reference is enforced. A
> >>   library may be added to do this job in the future.
> >> - m->next, m->nb_segs, and m->refcnt are always initialized for mbufs
> >>   in the pool, avoiding the need of setting m->next (located in the
> >>   2nd cache line) in the Rx path for mono-segment packets.
> >> - change port and nb_segs to 16 bits
> >> - move seqn in the 2nd cache line  
> > 
> > Applied, thanks for the long work
> >   
> 
> <...>
> 
> >> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized a bit,
> >> by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The patch 4/8 gives an
> >> idea of what could be done.  
> 
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> Some driver patches already received for this update, but not all yet.
> 
> Can you please describe what changes are required in PMDs after this
> patch? And what will be effect of doing changes or not?

Yes, I will do it.

> Later we can circulate this information through the PMD maintainers to
> be sure proper updates done.

That would be good.

Do you know what will be the procedure to inform the PMD maintainers?
Is there a specific mailing list?

Thanks,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Thomas Monjalon]

18/04/2017 15:04, Olivier MATZ:
> On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 14:10:33 +0100, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> 
wrote:
> > > 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
> > >> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized
> > >> a bit, by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The
> > >> patch 4/8 gives an idea of what could be done.
> > 
> > Hi Olivier,
> > 
> > Some driver patches already received for this update, but not all yet.
> > 
> > Can you please describe what changes are required in PMDs after this
> > patch? And what will be effect of doing changes or not?
> 
> Yes, I will do it.
> 
> > Later we can circulate this information through the PMD maintainers to
> > be sure proper updates done.
> 
> That would be good.
> 
> Do you know what will be the procedure to inform the PMD maintainers?
> Is there a specific mailing list?

We should explain the required changes on dev@dpdk.org as it can be
interesting for a lot of people (not only current maintainers).
Then we just have to make sure that the PMDs are updated accordingly
in a good timeframe (1 or 2 releases).
If we feel someone miss an important message, we can ping him directly,
without dev@dpdk.org cc'ed to make sure it pops up in his inbox.
The other communication channel to ping people is IRC freenode #dpdk.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Olivier MATZ]

On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:39:01 +0200, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 18/04/2017 15:04, Olivier MATZ:
> > On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 14:10:33 +0100, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>   
> wrote:
> > > > 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:  
> > > >> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be optimized
> > > >> a bit, by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The
> > > >> patch 4/8 gives an idea of what could be done.  
> > > 
> > > Hi Olivier,
> > > 
> > > Some driver patches already received for this update, but not all yet.
> > > 
> > > Can you please describe what changes are required in PMDs after this
> > > patch? And what will be effect of doing changes or not?  
> > 
> > Yes, I will do it.
> >   
> > > Later we can circulate this information through the PMD maintainers to
> > > be sure proper updates done.  
> > 
> > That would be good.
> > 
> > Do you know what will be the procedure to inform the PMD maintainers?
> > Is there a specific mailing list?  
> 
> We should explain the required changes on dev@dpdk.org as it can be
> interesting for a lot of people (not only current maintainers).

I agree here.

> Then we just have to make sure that the PMDs are updated accordingly
> in a good timeframe (1 or 2 releases).
> If we feel someone miss an important message, we can ping him directly,
> without dev@dpdk.org cc'ed to make sure it pops up in his inbox.
> The other communication channel to ping people is IRC freenode #dpdk.

Who is the "we"? In that particular case, is it my job?
Shouldn't we notify the PMD maintainers more precisely?

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Thomas Monjalon]

19/04/2017 14:28, Olivier MATZ:
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:39:01 +0200, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> 
wrote:
> > 18/04/2017 15:04, Olivier MATZ:
> > > On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 14:10:33 +0100, Ferruh Yigit
> > > <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> > 
> > wrote:
> > > > > 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
> > > > >> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be
> > > > >> optimized
> > > > >> a bit, by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The
> > > > >> patch 4/8 gives an idea of what could be done.
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > 
> > > > Some driver patches already received for this update, but not all yet.
> > > > 
> > > > Can you please describe what changes are required in PMDs after this
> > > > patch? And what will be effect of doing changes or not?
> > > 
> > > Yes, I will do it.
> > > 
> > > > Later we can circulate this information through the PMD maintainers to
> > > > be sure proper updates done.
> > > 
> > > That would be good.
> > > 
> > > Do you know what will be the procedure to inform the PMD maintainers?
> > > Is there a specific mailing list?
> > 
> > We should explain the required changes on dev@dpdk.org as it can be
> > interesting for a lot of people (not only current maintainers).
> 
> I agree here.
> 
> > Then we just have to make sure that the PMDs are updated accordingly
> > in a good timeframe (1 or 2 releases).
> > If we feel someone miss an important message, we can ping him directly,
> > without dev@dpdk.org cc'ed to make sure it pops up in his inbox.
> > The other communication channel to ping people is IRC freenode #dpdk.
> 
> Who is the "we"? In that particular case, is it my job?
> Shouldn't we notify the PMD maintainers more precisely?

We as a community :)
I think Ferruh will lead the follow-up of this rework,
as next-net maintainer.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 4/19/2017 1:56 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 19/04/2017 14:28, Olivier MATZ:
>> On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:39:01 +0200, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> 
> wrote:
>>> 18/04/2017 15:04, Olivier MATZ:
>>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 14:10:33 +0100, Ferruh Yigit
>>>> <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
>>>>>>> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be
>>>>>>> optimized
>>>>>>> a bit, by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The
>>>>>>> patch 4/8 gives an idea of what could be done.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Olivier,
>>>>>
>>>>> Some driver patches already received for this update, but not all yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please describe what changes are required in PMDs after this
>>>>> patch? And what will be effect of doing changes or not?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I will do it.
>>>>
>>>>> Later we can circulate this information through the PMD maintainers to
>>>>> be sure proper updates done.
>>>>
>>>> That would be good.
>>>>
>>>> Do you know what will be the procedure to inform the PMD maintainers?
>>>> Is there a specific mailing list?
>>>
>>> We should explain the required changes on dev@dpdk.org as it can be
>>> interesting for a lot of people (not only current maintainers).
>>
>> I agree here.
>>
>>> Then we just have to make sure that the PMDs are updated accordingly
>>> in a good timeframe (1 or 2 releases).
>>> If we feel someone miss an important message, we can ping him directly,
>>> without dev@dpdk.org cc'ed to make sure it pops up in his inbox.
>>> The other communication channel to ping people is IRC freenode #dpdk.
>>
>> Who is the "we"? In that particular case, is it my job?
>> Shouldn't we notify the PMD maintainers more precisely?
> 
> We as a community :)
> I think Ferruh will lead the follow-up of this rework,
> as next-net maintainer.

I can trace net PMDs.

Lets start in dev mail list and make sure what a PMD maintainer should
do is clear, we can wait for a release for updates, later I can ping
missing ones individually, what do you think?

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/8] mbuf: structure reorganization

[Thomas Monjalon]

19/04/2017 15:03, Ferruh Yigit:
> On 4/19/2017 1:56 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 19/04/2017 14:28, Olivier MATZ:
> >> On Wed, 19 Apr 2017 11:39:01 +0200, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > 
> > wrote:
> >>> 18/04/2017 15:04, Olivier MATZ:
> >>>> On Fri, 14 Apr 2017 14:10:33 +0100, Ferruh Yigit
> >>>> <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> >>> 
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>>> 2017-04-04 18:27, Olivier Matz:
> >>>>>>> Once this patchset is pushed, the Rx path of drivers could be
> >>>>>>> optimized
> >>>>>>> a bit, by removing writes to m->next, m->nb_segs and m->refcnt. The
> >>>>>>> patch 4/8 gives an idea of what could be done.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Hi Olivier,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Some driver patches already received for this update, but not all yet.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Can you please describe what changes are required in PMDs after this
> >>>>> patch? And what will be effect of doing changes or not?
> >>>> 
> >>>> Yes, I will do it.
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Later we can circulate this information through the PMD maintainers to
> >>>>> be sure proper updates done.
> >>>> 
> >>>> That would be good.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Do you know what will be the procedure to inform the PMD maintainers?
> >>>> Is there a specific mailing list?
> >>> 
> >>> We should explain the required changes on dev@dpdk.org as it can be
> >>> interesting for a lot of people (not only current maintainers).
> >> 
> >> I agree here.
> >> 
> >>> Then we just have to make sure that the PMDs are updated accordingly
> >>> in a good timeframe (1 or 2 releases).
> >>> If we feel someone miss an important message, we can ping him directly,
> >>> without dev@dpdk.org cc'ed to make sure it pops up in his inbox.
> >>> The other communication channel to ping people is IRC freenode #dpdk.
> >> 
> >> Who is the "we"? In that particular case, is it my job?
> >> Shouldn't we notify the PMD maintainers more precisely?
> > 
> > We as a community :)
> > I think Ferruh will lead the follow-up of this rework,
> > as next-net maintainer.
> 
> I can trace net PMDs.
> 
> Lets start in dev mail list and make sure what a PMD maintainer should
> do is clear, we can wait for a release for updates, later I can ping
> missing ones individually, what do you think?

Sounds like a plan :)
Thank you Ferruh and Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Wang, Zhihong]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM
> To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>;
> Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>;
> mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>;
> jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com;
> arybchenko@solarflare.com; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com;
> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb
> segments
> 
> Hi Yuanhan,
> 
> On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu
> <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > Hi Olivier,
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.
> >
> > But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't really
> > take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?
> >
> > 	--yliu
> 
> Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to
> make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type for
> a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could be a
> first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).
> 
> I'll do the change and send a rfc.

Ping ;) Is this still in your plan?

Thanks
Zhihong

> 
> Regards,
> Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Olivier Matz]

Hi,

On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:54:23 +0000, "Wang, Zhihong" <zhihong.wang@intel.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM
> > To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
> > Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>;
> > Richardson, Bruce <bruce.richardson@intel.com>;
> > mb@smartsharesystems.com; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>;
> > jblunck@infradead.org; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com;
> > arybchenko@solarflare.com; thomas.monjalon@6wind.com;
> > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb
> > segments
> > 
> > Hi Yuanhan,
> > 
> > On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu
> > <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:  
> > > Hi Olivier,
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.  
> > >
> > > But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't really
> > > take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?
> > >
> > > 	--yliu  
> > 
> > Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to
> > make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type for
> > a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could be a
> > first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).
> > 
> > I'll do the change and send a rfc.  
> 
> Ping ;) Is this still in your plan?
> 

Sorry, I don't think I will have time to work on this issue in the
coming weeks. If you plan to do it, I will be happy to help with reviews
and comments.

As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be
to introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in
one step when everyone uses this new type.

Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Morten Brørup]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 10:00 AM
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> nb segments
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:54:23 +0000, "Wang, Zhihong"
> <zhihong.wang@intel.com> wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM
> > > To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
> > >
> > > Hi Yuanhan,
> > >
> > > On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu
> > > <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.
> > > >
> > > > But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't
> > > > really take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?
> > > >
> > > > 	--yliu
> > >
> > > Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to
> > > make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type
> > > for a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could
> > > be a first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).
> > >
> > > I'll do the change and send a rfc.
> >
> > Ping ;) Is this still in your plan?
> >
> 
> Sorry, I don't think I will have time to work on this issue in the
> coming weeks. If you plan to do it, I will be happy to help with
> reviews and comments.
> 
> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to
> introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one
> step when everyone uses this new type.
> 
> Olivier

I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it has to be changed everywhere.

Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary solution will it be beneficial.


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Wiles, Keith]

On Jul 10, 2017, at 3:15 AM, Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com<mailto:mb@smartsharesystems.com>> wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
nb segments

Hi,

On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:54:23 +0000, "Wang, Zhihong"
<zhihong.wang@intel.com<mailto:zhihong.wang@intel.com>> wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM
To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com<mailto:yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>>

Hi Yuanhan,

On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu
<yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com<mailto:yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>> wrote:
Hi Olivier,

On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.

But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't
really take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?

--yliu

Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to
make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type
for a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could
be a first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).

I'll do the change and send a rfc.

Ping ;) Is this still in your plan?


Sorry, I don't think I will have time to work on this issue in the
coming weeks. If you plan to do it, I will be happy to help with
reviews and comments.

As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to
introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one
step when everyone uses this new type.

Olivier

I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it has to be changed everywhere.

Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary solution will it be beneficial.

I would like to see a much smaller typedef name here, we use it everywhere.
rte_port_id_t
port_id_t
port_num_t
portid_t

I do not see why it needs to be rte_eth or even rte_, if we do not put eth in the name then is could be used in crypto or someplace else.




Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Regards,
Keith

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Morten Brørup]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles, Keith
> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 3:26 PM
> To: Morten Brørup
> Cc: Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan Liu; DPDK; Ananyev,
> Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck;
> nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> thomas.monjalon@6wind.com; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> nb segments
> 
> 
> On Jul 10, 2017, at 3:15 AM, Morten Brørup
> <mb@smartsharesystems.com<mailto:mb@smartsharesystems.com>> wrote:
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 10:00 AM
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> nb segments
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:54:23 +0000, "Wang, Zhihong"
> <zhihong.wang@intel.com<mailto:zhihong.wang@intel.com>> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM
> To: Yuanhan Liu
> <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com<mailto:yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>>
> 
> Hi Yuanhan,
> 
> On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu
> <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com<mailto:yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>>
> wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.
> 
> But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't really
> take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?
> 
> --yliu
> 
> Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to make
> the change effective. I think we could define a specific type for a
> port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could be a first
> step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).
> 
> I'll do the change and send a rfc.
> 
> Ping ;) Is this still in your plan?
> 
> 
> Sorry, I don't think I will have time to work on this issue in the
> coming weeks. If you plan to do it, I will be happy to help with
> reviews and comments.
> 
> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to
> introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one
> step when everyone uses this new type.
> 
> Olivier
> 
> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the variable
> types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has the
> unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it has to be
> changed everywhere.
> 
> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same files
> at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary solution
> will it be beneficial.
> 
> I would like to see a much smaller typedef name here, we use it
> everywhere.
> rte_port_id_t
> port_id_t
> port_num_t
> portid_t
> 
> I do not see why it needs to be rte_eth or even rte_, if we do not put
> eth in the name then is could be used in crypto or someplace else.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> - Morten Brørup
> 
> Regards,
> Keith

What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including in the ethdev APIs.

Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of this variable.

Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Wiles, Keith]

Resend because of format problems sorry.

> On Jul 10, 2017, at 3:15 AM, Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
>> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 10:00 AM
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
>> nb segments
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:54:23 +0000, "Wang, Zhihong"
>> <zhihong.wang@intel.com> wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM
>>>> To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
>>>> 
>>>> Hi Yuanhan,
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu
>>>> <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Olivier,
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:
>>>>>> Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.
>>>>> 
>>>>> But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't
>>>>> really take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 	--yliu
>>>> 
>>>> Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to
>>>> make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type
>>>> for a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could
>>>> be a first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).
>>>> 
>>>> I'll do the change and send a rfc.
>>> 
>>> Ping ;) Is this still in your plan?
>>> 
>> 
>> Sorry, I don't think I will have time to work on this issue in the
>> coming weeks. If you plan to do it, I will be happy to help with
>> reviews and comments.
>> 
>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to
>> introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one
>> step when everyone uses this new type.
>> 
>> Olivier
> 
> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it has to be changed everywhere.
> 
> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary solution will it be beneficial.

I would like to see a much smaller typedef name here, we use it everywhere.
rte_port_id_t
port_id_t
port_num_t
portid_t
pid_t
rte_pid_t

I do not see why it needs to be rte_eth or even rte_, if we do not put eth in the name then is could be used in crypto or someplace else.
> 
> 
> Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> - Morten Brørup

Regards,
Keith

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Olivier MATZ]

On Tue, 11 Jul 2017 13:34:47 +0000, "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com> wrote:
> Resend because of format problems sorry.
> 
> > On Jul 10, 2017, at 3:15 AM, Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier Matz
> >> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 10:00 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> >> nb segments
> >> 
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> On Tue, 4 Jul 2017 07:54:23 +0000, "Wang, Zhihong"
> >> <zhihong.wang@intel.com> wrote:  
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Olivier MATZ
> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2017 9:03 PM
> >>>> To: Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>
> >>>> 
> >>>> Hi Yuanhan,
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 13:45:23 +0800, Yuanhan Liu
> >>>> <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com> wrote:  
> >>>>> Hi Olivier,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 06:28:05PM +0200, Olivier Matz wrote:  
> >>>>>> Change the size of m->port and m->nb_segs to 16 bits.  
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> But all the ethdev APIs are still using 8 bits. 16 bits won't
> >>>>> really take effect without updating those APIs. Any plans?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 	--yliu  
> >>>> 
> >>>> Yes, there is some work in ethdev, drivers and in example apps to
> >>>> make the change effective. I think we could define a specific type
> >>>> for a port number, maybe rte_eth_port_num_t. Using this type could
> >>>> be a first step (for 17.08) before switching to 16 bits (17.11?).
> >>>> 
> >>>> I'll do the change and send a rfc.  
> >>> 
> >>> Ping ;) Is this still in your plan?
> >>>   
> >> 
> >> Sorry, I don't think I will have time to work on this issue in the
> >> coming weeks. If you plan to do it, I will be happy to help with
> >> reviews and comments.
> >> 
> >> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to
> >> introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
> >> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one
> >> step when everyone uses this new type.
> >> 
> >> Olivier  
> > 
> > I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it has to be changed everywhere.
> > 
> > Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary solution will it be beneficial.  
> 
> I would like to see a much smaller typedef name here, we use it everywhere.
> rte_port_id_t
> port_id_t
> port_num_t
> portid_t
> pid_t
> rte_pid_t
> 
> I do not see why it needs to be rte_eth or even rte_, if we do not put eth in the name then is could be used in crypto or someplace else.

rte_ is required because we want to avoid namespace collision.
For instance, portid_t is too generic, and we would take the risk
that it is also defined for something else in another .h file.

Knowing it is is an ethernet port identifier, I also think eth_ is more
consistent regarding what we already have in rte_ethdev.h.

About num vs id, I have no strong opinion.

*pid_t looks really unclear to me :)


Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nb segments

[Thomas Monjalon]

11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> Morten Brørup wrote:
> > Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would be to
> > > introduce a typedef for the port number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > > It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits in one
> > > step when everyone uses this new type.
> > 
> > I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the variable
> > types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has the
> > unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it has to be
> > changed everywhere.
> > 
> > Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same files
> > at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary solution
> > will it be beneficial.
[...]
> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including in the ethdev APIs.
> 
> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of this variable.

So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?

Note: I have no strong opinion.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nbsegments

[Morten Brørup]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
> To: Morten Brørup
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan
> Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
> Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> nbsegments
> 
> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> > Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would
> > > > be to introduce a typedef for the port number:
> rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > > > It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits
> in
> > > > one step when everyone uses this new type.
> > >
> > > I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the
> > > variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has
> > > the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it
> > > has to be changed everywhere.
> > >
> > > Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same
> > > files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary
> > > solution will it be beneficial.
> [...]
> > What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type
> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type
> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including in
> the ethdev APIs.
> >
> > Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of
> this variable.
> 
> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> 
> Note: I have no strong opinion.

I'm against the typedef because it would break convention, and I'm a strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the Linux convention of not hiding simple types.

We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what we change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime in the future, then a typedef will save us next time.)

However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple types, they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular or obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and I consider that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be a good name for this type.

My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t everywhere.

Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nbsegments

[Wiles, Keith]

> On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
>> To: Morten Brørup
>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan
>> Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
>> Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
>> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
>> nbsegments
>> 
>> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
>>> Morten Brørup wrote:
>>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
>>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would
>>>>> be to introduce a typedef for the port number:
>> rte_eth_port_num_t.
>>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits
>> in
>>>>> one step when everyone uses this new type.
>>>> 
>>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the
>>>> variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This has
>>>> the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it
>>>> has to be changed everywhere.
>>>> 
>>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same
>>>> files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary
>>>> solution will it be beneficial.
>> [...]
>>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type
>> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type
>> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including in
>> the ethdev APIs.
>>> 
>>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of
>> this variable.
>> 
>> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
>> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
>> 
>> Note: I have no strong opinion.
> 
> I'm against the typedef because it would break convention, and I'm a strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the Linux convention of not hiding simple types.
> 
> We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what we change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime in the future, then a typedef will save us next time.)

If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first one (if still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to have more then 2 bytes would be to encode something into the port id value, which I could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.

> 
> However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple types, they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular or obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and I consider that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be a good name for this type.
> 
> My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t everywhere.
> 
> Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> - Morten Brørup
> 

As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it to be more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us needing to change it again in the near future. The only reason to make it a typedef is to be able to identify from just the prototype of the function that it takes a port ID value, which I am in favor of doing here for that reason.

As for Olivier’s statement about the typedef name I do not see the need for ‘_eth_' to be part of the typedef as it conveys no extra information in the name. Everything port related in DPDK is a ethernet type device or port. If we do add something like fiber channel maybe rte_pid_t is reason to that too, but if it contains ‘_eth_’ it would not.

I would like to see names that are just short enough to convey the information and not be redundant. IMHO rte_pid_t is fine, but if we use some something similar to the length of uint8_t (7) or uint16_t (8) characters then we would not have to also reformat the line more then needed. Using rte_pid_t (pid == port_id) we only extend the length by one (or two) characters and most likely the added byte(s) will not cause more format problems in the code.

Regards,
Keith

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nbsegments

[Morten Brørup]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles, Keith
> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 6:48 PM
> To: Morten Brørup
> Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan Liu;
> Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck;
> Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> nbsegments
> 
> 
> > On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup
> <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
> >> To: Morten Brørup
> >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan
> >> Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
> >> Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> >> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> and
> >> nbsegments
> >>
> >> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> >>> Morten Brørup wrote:
> >>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
> >>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would
> >>>>> be to introduce a typedef for the port number:
> >> rte_eth_port_num_t.
> >>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits
> >> in
> >>>>> one step when everyone uses this new type.
> >>>>
> >>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the
> >>>> variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This
> has
> >>>> the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it
> >>>> has to be changed everywhere.
> >>>>
> >>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same
> >>>> files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary
> >>>> solution will it be beneficial.
> >> [...]
> >>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type
> >> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the
> type
> >> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including
> in
> >> the ethdev APIs.
> >>>
> >>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of
> >> this variable.
> >>
> >> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> >> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> >>
> >> Note: I have no strong opinion.
> >
> > I'm against the typedef because it would break convention, and I'm a
> strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for
> typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the Linux
> convention of not hiding simple types.
> >
> > We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what we
> > change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime in the
> > future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
> 
> If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first one (if
> still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to have more then 2
> bytes would be to encode something into the port id value, which I
> could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
> 
> >
> > However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple types,
> they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular or
> obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and I consider
> that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be a good name for
> this type.
> >
> > My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
> everywhere.
> >
> > Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> > - Morten Brørup
> >
> 
> As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it to be
> more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us needing to
> change it again in the near future. The only reason to make it a
> typedef is to be able to identify from just the prototype of the
> function that it takes a port ID value, which I am in favor of doing
> here for that reason.

That is not a very good reason: When used as a function parameter, the type is only shown in the function declaration, whereas the variable name is shown every time it is used inside the function. So remember to always use meaningful variable names, such as "port" (like in the mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other places).

> 
> As for Olivier’s statement about the typedef name I do not see the need
> for ‘_eth_' to be part of the typedef as it conveys no extra
> information in the name. Everything port related in DPDK is a ethernet
> type device or port. If we do add something like fiber channel maybe
> rte_pid_t is reason to that too, but if it contains ‘_eth_’ it would
> not.
> 
> I would like to see names that are just short enough to convey the
> information and not be redundant. IMHO rte_pid_t is fine, but if we use
> some something similar to the length of uint8_t (7) or uint16_t (8)
> characters then we would not have to also reformat the line more then
> needed. Using rte_pid_t (pid == port_id) we only extend the length by
> one (or two) characters and most likely the added byte(s) will not
> cause more format problems in the code.

I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it against the coding style, although after reviewing the official DPDK Coding Style documentation (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html), I can see that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note that section 1.5.7 of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says that the _t postfix should be avoided. Anyway, if we end up with a typedef, please don't use something resembling pid_t known from POSIX (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-Identification.html).


> 
> Regards,
> Keith

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nbsegments

[Yang, Zhiyong]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Morten Brørup
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 3:25 PM
> To: Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com>
> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>; Olivier
> Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Wang, Zhihong <zhihong.wang@intel.com>;
> Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Chilikin, Andrey <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>;
> Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>; Nélio Laranjeiro
> <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> nbsegments
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles, Keith
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 6:48 PM
> > To: Morten Brørup
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan Liu;
> > Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck;
> > Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> > nbsegments
> >
> >
> > > On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup
> > <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
> > >> Monjalon
> > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
> > >> To: Morten Brørup
> > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong;
> > >> Yuanhan Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin,
> > >> Andrey; Jan Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com;
> > >> arybchenko@solarflare.com; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> > and
> > >> nbsegments
> > >>
> > >> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> > >>> Morten Brørup wrote:
> > >>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
> > >>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would
> > >>>>> be to introduce a typedef for the port number:
> > >> rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > >>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits
> > >> in
> > >>>>> one step when everyone uses this new type.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the
> > >>>> variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This
> > has
> > >>>> the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it
> > >>>> has to be changed everywhere.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same
> > >>>> files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a
> > >>>> temporary solution will it be beneficial.
> > >> [...]
> > >>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type
> > >> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the
> > type
> > >> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including
> > in
> > >> the ethdev APIs.
> > >>>
> > >>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of
> > >> this variable.
> > >>
> > >> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> > >> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> > >>
> > >> Note: I have no strong opinion.
> > >
> > > I'm against the typedef because it would break convention, and I'm a
> > strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for
> > typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the
> > Linux convention of not hiding simple types.
> > >
> > > We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what we
> > > change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime in the
> > > future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
> >
> > If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first one (if
> > still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to have more then
> > 2 bytes would be to encode something into the port id value, which I
> > could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
> >
> > >
> > > However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple types,
> > they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular or
> > obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and I
> > consider that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be a good
> > name for this type.
> > >
> > > My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
> > everywhere.
> > >
> > > Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> > > - Morten Brørup
> > >
> >
> > As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it to be
> > more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us needing to
> > change it again in the near future. The only reason to make it a
> > typedef is to be able to identify from just the prototype of the
> > function that it takes a port ID value, which I am in favor of doing
> > here for that reason.
> 
> That is not a very good reason: When used as a function parameter, the type is
> only shown in the function declaration, whereas the variable name is shown
> every time it is used inside the function. So remember to always use meaningful
> variable names, such as "port" (like in the mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in
> other places).
> 
> >
> > As for Olivier’s statement about the typedef name I do not see the
> > need for ‘_eth_' to be part of the typedef as it conveys no extra
> > information in the name. Everything port related in DPDK is a ethernet
> > type device or port. If we do add something like fiber channel maybe
> > rte_pid_t is reason to that too, but if it contains ‘_eth_’ it would
> > not.
> >
> > I would like to see names that are just short enough to convey the
> > information and not be redundant. IMHO rte_pid_t is fine, but if we
> > use some something similar to the length of uint8_t (7) or uint16_t
> > (8) characters then we would not have to also reformat the line more
> > then needed. Using rte_pid_t (pid == port_id) we only extend the
> > length by one (or two) characters and most likely the added byte(s)
> > will not cause more format problems in the code.
> 
> I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it against the coding
> style, although after reviewing the official DPDK Coding Style documentation
> (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html), I can see that it is
> not explicitly stated. Please also note that section 1.5.7 of the DPDK Coding
> Style documentation says that the _t postfix should be avoided. Anyway, if we
> end up with a typedef, please don't use something resembling pid_t known from
> POSIX (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-
> Identification.html).
> 

How about rte_dev_id_t?

Thanks
Zhiyong

> 
> >
> > Regards,
> > Keith

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port andnbsegments

[Morten Brørup]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yang, Zhiyong [mailto:zhiyong.yang@intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 11:02 AM
> To: Morten Brørup; Wiles, Keith
> Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan Liu;
> Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck;
> Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> andnbsegments
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Morten Brørup
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 3:25 PM
> > To: Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com>
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>;
> > Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Wang, Zhihong
> > <zhihong.wang@intel.com>; Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>;
> > Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> > <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Chilikin, Andrey
> > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>;
> Nélio
> > Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> > nbsegments
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles, Keith
> > > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 6:48 PM
> > > To: Morten Brørup
> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan
> Liu;
> > > Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
> > > Blunck; Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> > > and nbsegments
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup
> > > <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
> > > >> Monjalon
> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
> > > >> To: Morten Brørup
> > > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong;
> > > >> Yuanhan Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin,
> > > >> Andrey; Jan Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com;
> > > >> arybchenko@solarflare.com; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for
> port
> > > and
> > > >> nbsegments
> > > >>
> > > >> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> > > >>> Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > >>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > >>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step
> > > >>>>> would be to introduce a typedef for the port number:
> > > >> rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > > >>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16
> > > >>>>> bits
> > > >> in
> > > >>>>> one step when everyone uses this new type.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the
> > > >>>> variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs.
> This
> > > has
> > > >>>> the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes,
> > > >>>> it has to be changed everywhere.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the
> same
> > > >>>> files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a
> > > >>>> temporary solution will it be beneficial.
> > > >> [...]
> > > >>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about
> > > >>> type
> > > >> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the
> > > type
> > > >> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too,
> > > >> including
> > > in
> > > >> the ethdev APIs.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type
> > > >>> of
> > > >> this variable.
> > > >>
> > > >> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> > > >> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> > > >>
> > > >> Note: I have no strong opinion.
> > > >
> > > > I'm against the typedef because it would break convention, and
> I'm
> > > > a
> > > strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for
> > > typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the
> > > Linux convention of not hiding simple types.
> > > >
> > > > We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what we
> > > > change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime in the
> > > > future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
> > >
> > > If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first one
> > > (if still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to have
> more
> > > then
> > > 2 bytes would be to encode something into the port id value, which
> I
> > > could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple
> > > > types,
> > > they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular or
> > > obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and I
> > > consider that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be a
> good
> > > name for this type.
> > > >
> > > > My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
> > > everywhere.
> > > >
> > > > Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> > > > - Morten Brørup
> > > >
> > >
> > > As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it to
> > > be more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us needing
> to
> > > change it again in the near future. The only reason to make it a
> > > typedef is to be able to identify from just the prototype of the
> > > function that it takes a port ID value, which I am in favor of
> doing
> > > here for that reason.
> >
> > That is not a very good reason: When used as a function parameter,
> the
> > type is only shown in the function declaration, whereas the variable
> > name is shown every time it is used inside the function. So remember
> > to always use meaningful variable names, such as "port" (like in the
> > mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other places).
> >
> > >
> > > As for Olivier’s statement about the typedef name I do not see the
> > > need for ‘_eth_' to be part of the typedef as it conveys no extra
> > > information in the name. Everything port related in DPDK is a
> > > ethernet type device or port. If we do add something like fiber
> > > channel maybe rte_pid_t is reason to that too, but if it contains
> > > ‘_eth_’ it would not.
> > >
> > > I would like to see names that are just short enough to convey the
> > > information and not be redundant. IMHO rte_pid_t is fine, but if we
> > > use some something similar to the length of uint8_t (7) or uint16_t
> > > (8) characters then we would not have to also reformat the line
> more
> > > then needed. Using rte_pid_t (pid == port_id) we only extend the
> > > length by one (or two) characters and most likely the added byte(s)
> > > will not cause more format problems in the code.
> >
> > I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it
> against
> > the coding style, although after reviewing the official DPDK Coding
> > Style documentation
> > (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html), I can
> see
> > that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note that section 1.5.7
> > of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says that the _t postfix
> should
> > be avoided. Anyway, if we end up with a typedef, please don't use
> > something resembling pid_t known from POSIX
> > (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-
> > Identification.html).
> >
> 
> How about rte_dev_id_t?
> 
> Thanks
> Zhiyong
> 
> >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Keith

If the DPDK Coding Style is based on Linux Coding Style, we should avoid typedefs in general, not just for structures. Please read Linus Torvalds' opinions about it: http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/typedefs.html

Perhaps the DPDK Coding Style should be updated to clarify this. (Or if we decide otherwise, to explicitly mention this deviation from the Linux coding style.)


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and nbsegments

[Wiles, Keith]

> On Jul 12, 2017, at 2:25 AM, Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles, Keith
>> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 6:48 PM
>> To: Morten Brørup
>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan Liu;
>> Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck;
>> Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
>> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
>> nbsegments
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup
>> <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Monjalon
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
>>>> To: Morten Brørup
>>>> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan
>>>> Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
>>>> Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
>>>> jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
>> and
>>>> nbsegments
>>>> 
>>>> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
>>>>> Morten Brørup wrote:
>>>>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
>>>>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step would
>>>>>>> be to introduce a typedef for the port number:
>>>> rte_eth_port_num_t.
>>>>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16 bits
>>>> in
>>>>>>> one step when everyone uses this new type.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the
>>>>>> variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs. This
>> has
>>>>>> the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes, it
>>>>>> has to be changed everywhere.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the same
>>>>>> files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a temporary
>>>>>> solution will it be beneficial.
>>>> [...]
>>>>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about type
>>>> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the
>> type
>>>> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too, including
>> in
>>>> the ethdev APIs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type of
>>>> this variable.
>>>> 
>>>> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
>>>> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
>>>> 
>>>> Note: I have no strong opinion.
>>> 
>>> I'm against the typedef because it would break convention, and I'm a
>> strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for
>> typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the Linux
>> convention of not hiding simple types.
>>> 
>>> We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what we
>>> change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime in the
>>> future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
>> 
>> If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first one (if
>> still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to have more then 2
>> bytes would be to encode something into the port id value, which I
>> could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
>> 
>>> 
>>> However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple types,
>> they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular or
>> obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and I consider
>> that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be a good name for
>> this type.
>>> 
>>> My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
>> everywhere.
>>> 
>>> Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
>>> - Morten Brørup
>>> 
>> 
>> As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it to be
>> more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us needing to
>> change it again in the near future. The only reason to make it a
>> typedef is to be able to identify from just the prototype of the
>> function that it takes a port ID value, which I am in favor of doing
>> here for that reason.
> 
> That is not a very good reason: When used as a function parameter, the type is only shown in the function declaration, whereas the variable name is shown every time it is used inside the function. So remember to always use meaningful variable names, such as "port" (like in the mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other places).

I stated in the prototype not docs, which does pop up in some edits and so forth. Using the correct variable names it a given and not the subject of this discussion. Even Torvalds’ states that typedefs are reasonable in some cases, not sure this one falls in to that slot. Typedefs for structures were the main concern from Torvald is what I took from his email and we are not talking about a structure here.

> 
>> 
>> As for Olivier’s statement about the typedef name I do not see the need
>> for ‘_eth_' to be part of the typedef as it conveys no extra
>> information in the name. Everything port related in DPDK is a ethernet
>> type device or port. If we do add something like fiber channel maybe
>> rte_pid_t is reason to that too, but if it contains ‘_eth_’ it would
>> not.
>> 
>> I would like to see names that are just short enough to convey the
>> information and not be redundant. IMHO rte_pid_t is fine, but if we use
>> some something similar to the length of uint8_t (7) or uint16_t (8)
>> characters then we would not have to also reformat the line more then
>> needed. Using rte_pid_t (pid == port_id) we only extend the length by
>> one (or two) characters and most likely the added byte(s) will not
>> cause more format problems in the code.
> 
> I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it against the coding style, although after reviewing the official DPDK Coding Style documentation (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html), I can see that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note that section 1.5.7 of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says that the _t postfix should be avoided. Anyway, if we end up with a typedef, please don't use something resembling pid_t known from POSIX (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-Identification.html).

Even the Linux uint16_t is a typedef, so even Linux thought using a typedef here was reasonable as it changes from arch to arch. The real question here is does the port id fall into this category. Most likely not in this case unless we think the variable will change in the future or we decide to encode more information to the variable then just a simple port id 0-N.

If we can not determine it falls into this category then we use a scalar typedef like uint16_t, which seems to be the norm here. My point about typedefs mainly was around the name if we have a typedef not to make it 40 characters long or have redundant information in the typedef name.

So it appears the port ID value is not going to change any time soon and we do not need to make it opaque or encode information into the variable, which to me means we need to use the standard typedef from Linux ‘uint16_t’.

Is that agreeable with everyone or do you have a good reason to make it a typedef?

> 
> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Keith

Regards,
Keith

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port andnbsegments

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:50:38 +0200
Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Yang, Zhiyong [mailto:zhiyong.yang@intel.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 11:02 AM
> > To: Morten Brørup; Wiles, Keith
> > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan Liu;
> > Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck;
> > Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> > andnbsegments
> > 
> > 
> >   
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Morten Brørup
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 3:25 PM
> > > To: Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com>
> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>;
> > > Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Wang, Zhihong
> > > <zhihong.wang@intel.com>; Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>;
> > > Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> > > <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>;  
> > Nélio  
> > > Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port and
> > > nbsegments
> > >  
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles, Keith
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 6:48 PM
> > > > To: Morten Brørup
> > > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan  
> > Liu;  
> > > > Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
> > > > Blunck; Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > > > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> > > > and nbsegments
> > > >
> > > >  
> > > > > On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup  
> > > > <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:  
> > > > >  
> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
> > > > >> Monjalon
> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
> > > > >> To: Morten Brørup
> > > > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong;
> > > > >> Yuanhan Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin,
> > > > >> Andrey; Jan Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com;
> > > > >> arybchenko@solarflare.com; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for  
> > port  
> > > > and  
> > > > >> nbsegments
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:  
> > > > >>> Morten Brørup wrote:  
> > > > >>>> Olivier Matz wrote:  
> > > > >>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first step
> > > > >>>>> would be to introduce a typedef for the port number:  
> > > > >> rte_eth_port_num_t.  
> > > > >>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to 16
> > > > >>>>> bits  
> > > > >> in  
> > > > >>>>> one step when everyone uses this new type.  
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing the
> > > > >>>> variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind typedefs.  
> > This  
> > > > has  
> > > > >>>> the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type changes,
> > > > >>>> it has to be changed everywhere.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the  
> > same  
> > > > >>>> files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a
> > > > >>>> temporary solution will it be beneficial.  
> > > > >> [...]  
> > > > >>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument about
> > > > >>> type  
> > > > >> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the  
> > > > type  
> > > > >> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too,
> > > > >> including  
> > > > in  
> > > > >> the ethdev APIs.  
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the type
> > > > >>> of  
> > > > >> this variable.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> > > > >> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Note: I have no strong opinion.  
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm against the typedef because it would break convention, and  
> > I'm  
> > > > > a  
> > > > strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for
> > > > typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the
> > > > Linux convention of not hiding simple types.  
> > > > >
> > > > > We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what we
> > > > > change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime in the
> > > > > future, then a typedef will save us next time.)  
> > > >
> > > > If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first one
> > > > (if still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to have  
> > more  
> > > > then
> > > > 2 bytes would be to encode something into the port id value, which  
> > I  
> > > > could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
> > > >  
> > > > >
> > > > > However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple
> > > > > types,  
> > > > they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular or
> > > > obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and I
> > > > consider that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be a  
> > good  
> > > > name for this type.  
> > > > >
> > > > > My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t  
> > > > everywhere.  
> > > > >
> > > > > Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> > > > > - Morten Brørup
> > > > >  
> > > >
> > > > As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it to
> > > > be more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us needing  
> > to  
> > > > change it again in the near future. The only reason to make it a
> > > > typedef is to be able to identify from just the prototype of the
> > > > function that it takes a port ID value, which I am in favor of  
> > doing  
> > > > here for that reason.  
> > >
> > > That is not a very good reason: When used as a function parameter,  
> > the  
> > > type is only shown in the function declaration, whereas the variable
> > > name is shown every time it is used inside the function. So remember
> > > to always use meaningful variable names, such as "port" (like in the
> > > mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other places).
> > >  
> > > >
> > > > As for Olivier’s statement about the typedef name I do not see the
> > > > need for ‘_eth_' to be part of the typedef as it conveys no extra
> > > > information in the name. Everything port related in DPDK is a
> > > > ethernet type device or port. If we do add something like fiber
> > > > channel maybe rte_pid_t is reason to that too, but if it contains
> > > > ‘_eth_’ it would not.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to see names that are just short enough to convey the
> > > > information and not be redundant. IMHO rte_pid_t is fine, but if we
> > > > use some something similar to the length of uint8_t (7) or uint16_t
> > > > (8) characters then we would not have to also reformat the line  
> > more  
> > > > then needed. Using rte_pid_t (pid == port_id) we only extend the
> > > > length by one (or two) characters and most likely the added byte(s)
> > > > will not cause more format problems in the code.  
> > >
> > > I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it  
> > against  
> > > the coding style, although after reviewing the official DPDK Coding
> > > Style documentation
> > > (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html), I can  
> > see  
> > > that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note that section 1.5.7
> > > of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says that the _t postfix  
> > should  
> > > be avoided. Anyway, if we end up with a typedef, please don't use
> > > something resembling pid_t known from POSIX
> > > (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-
> > > Identification.html).
> > >  
> > 
> > How about rte_dev_id_t?
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Zhiyong
> >   
> > >  
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Keith  
> 
> If the DPDK Coding Style is based on Linux Coding Style, we should avoid typedefs in general, not just for structures. Please read Linus Torvalds' opinions about it: http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/typedefs.html
> 
> Perhaps the DPDK Coding Style should be updated to clarify this. (Or if we decide otherwise, to explicitly mention this deviation from the Linux coding style.)

It is logical to use typedef's for this kind of scalar type that may need to change.
Names matter, please avoid pid (confuse with posix) and  dev (confuse with device id).
I would prefer: rte_portid_t and rte_queueid_t

Longer term, probably rte_eth_devices[] needs to go. Change port id  into something
more like ifindex. And use sparse data structure to allow very large number of devices
and non-contiguous lookup. Think of a VPN server where each VPN connection looks
like a DPDK device.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port andnbsegments

[Morten Brørup]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Hemminger
> Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 5:36 PM
> To: Morten Brørup
> Cc: Yang, Zhiyong; Wiles, Keith; Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz;
> Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce;
> Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck; Nélio Laranjeiro;
> arybchenko@solarflare.com; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> andnbsegments
> 
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 11:50:38 +0200
> Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Yang, Zhiyong [mailto:zhiyong.yang@intel.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 11:02 AM
> > > To: Morten Brørup; Wiles, Keith
> > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan
> Liu;
> > > Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
> > > Blunck; Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> > > andnbsegments
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Morten
> Brørup
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 3:25 PM
> > > > To: Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com>
> > > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; DPDK <dev@dpdk.org>;
> > > > Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>; Wang, Zhihong
> > > > <zhihong.wang@intel.com>; Yuanhan Liu
> > > > <yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com>; Ananyev, Konstantin
> > > > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>; Richardson, Bruce
> > > > <bruce.richardson@intel.com>; Chilikin, Andrey
> > > > <andrey.chilikin@intel.com>; Jan Blunck <jblunck@infradead.org>;
> > > Nélio
> > > > Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>;
> > > > arybchenko@solarflare.com; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port
> > > > and nbsegments
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Wiles,
> > > > > Keith
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 6:48 PM
> > > > > To: Morten Brørup
> > > > > Cc: Thomas Monjalon; DPDK; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong; Yuanhan
> > > Liu;
> > > > > Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce; Chilikin, Andrey; Jan
> > > > > Blunck; Nélio Laranjeiro; arybchenko@solarflare.com;
> > > > > jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for
> > > > > port and nbsegments
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup
> > > > > <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
> > > > > >> Monjalon
> > > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 5:06 PM
> > > > > >> To: Morten Brørup
> > > > > >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Wiles, Keith; Olivier Matz; Wang, Zhihong;
> > > > > >> Yuanhan Liu; Ananyev, Konstantin; Richardson, Bruce;
> > > > > >> Chilikin, Andrey; Jan Blunck; nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com;
> > > > > >> arybchenko@solarflare.com; jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
> > > > > >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for
> > > port
> > > > > and
> > > > > >> nbsegments
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> > > > > >>> Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > > >>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > >>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first
> step
> > > > > >>>>> would be to introduce a typedef for the port number:
> > > > > >> rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > > > > >>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched to
> 16
> > > > > >>>>> bits
> > > > > >> in
> > > > > >>>>> one step when everyone uses this new type.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing
> > > > > >>>> the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind
> typedefs.
> > > This
> > > > > has
> > > > > >>>> the unfortunate consequence that when a variable type
> > > > > >>>> changes, it has to be changed everywhere.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the
> > > same
> > > > > >>>> files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a
> > > > > >>>> temporary solution will it be beneficial.
> > > > > >> [...]
> > > > > >>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument
> about
> > > > > >>> type
> > > > > >> definitions was: When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit,
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > type
> > > > > >> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too,
> > > > > >> including
> > > > > in
> > > > > >> the ethdev APIs.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the
> > > > > >>> type of
> > > > > >> this variable.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> > > > > >> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Note: I have no strong opinion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm against the typedef because it would break convention,
> and
> > > I'm
> > > > > > a
> > > > > strong proponent of conventions. In other projects, I'm all for
> > > > > typedefs, virtual classes, inheritance etc., but DPDK follows
> > > > > the Linux convention of not hiding simple types.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what
> > > > > > we change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime
> > > > > > in the future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
> > > > >
> > > > > If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first
> > > > > one (if still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to
> > > > > have
> > > more
> > > > > then
> > > > > 2 bytes would be to encode something into the port id value,
> > > > > which
> > > I
> > > > > could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > However, if we change the convention and start hiding simple
> > > > > > types,
> > > > > they still need the rte_ prefix regardless if they are popular
> > > > > or obscure types. Even struct rte_mbuf has the rte_ prefix, and
> > > > > I consider that a very popular type. If so, rte_port_t would be
> > > > > a
> > > good
> > > > > name for this type.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
> > > > > everywhere.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
> > > > > > - Morten Brørup
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it
> > > > > to be more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us
> > > > > needing
> > > to
> > > > > change it again in the near future. The only reason to make it
> a
> > > > > typedef is to be able to identify from just the prototype of
> the
> > > > > function that it takes a port ID value, which I am in favor of
> > > doing
> > > > > here for that reason.
> > > >
> > > > That is not a very good reason: When used as a function
> parameter,
> > > the
> > > > type is only shown in the function declaration, whereas the
> > > > variable name is shown every time it is used inside the function.
> > > > So remember to always use meaningful variable names, such as
> > > > "port" (like in the mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other
> places).
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As for Olivier’s statement about the typedef name I do not see
> > > > > the need for ‘_eth_' to be part of the typedef as it conveys no
> > > > > extra information in the name. Everything port related in DPDK
> > > > > is a ethernet type device or port. If we do add something like
> > > > > fiber channel maybe rte_pid_t is reason to that too, but if it
> > > > > contains ‘_eth_’ it would not.
> > > > >
> > > > > I would like to see names that are just short enough to convey
> > > > > the information and not be redundant. IMHO rte_pid_t is fine,
> > > > > but if we use some something similar to the length of uint8_t
> > > > > (7) or uint16_t
> > > > > (8) characters then we would not have to also reformat the line
> > > more
> > > > > then needed. Using rte_pid_t (pid == port_id) we only extend
> the
> > > > > length by one (or two) characters and most likely the added
> > > > > byte(s) will not cause more format problems in the code.
> > > >
> > > > I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it
> > > against
> > > > the coding style, although after reviewing the official DPDK
> > > > Coding Style documentation
> > > > (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html), I
> can
> > > see
> > > > that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note that section
> > > > 1.5.7 of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says that the _t
> > > > postfix
> > > should
> > > > be avoided. Anyway, if we end up with a typedef, please don't use
> > > > something resembling pid_t known from POSIX
> > > > (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-
> > > > Identification.html).
> > > >
> > >
> > > How about rte_dev_id_t?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Zhiyong
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Keith
> >
> > If the DPDK Coding Style is based on Linux Coding Style, we should
> > avoid typedefs in general, not just for structures. Please read Linus
> > Torvalds' opinions about it:
> > http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/typedefs.html
> >
> > Perhaps the DPDK Coding Style should be updated to clarify this. (Or
> > if we decide otherwise, to explicitly mention this deviation from the
> > Linux coding style.)
> 
> It is logical to use typedef's for this kind of scalar type that may
> need to change.
> Names matter, please avoid pid (confuse with posix) and  dev (confuse
> with device id).
> I would prefer: rte_portid_t and rte_queueid_t
> 
> Longer term, probably rte_eth_devices[] needs to go. Change port id
> into something more like ifindex. And use sparse data structure to
> allow very large number of devices and non-contiguous lookup. Think of
> a VPN server where each VPN connection looks like a DPDK device.

We are using a non-contiguous ifindex in our firmware, for virtual interfaces as you mention, so I get your point here! But until DPDK gets there, I suppose the DPDK port id is considered more or less contiguous.

You clearly have a longer track record working with Linus than me, so if you interpret the coding style like that, I will not object anymore - as my objection was based on coding style. And will someone please update the DPDK Coding Style document accordingly...

rte_portid_t is fine with me, but why not just rte_port_t?

PS: uint16_t is a standard C type, not a Linux specific type.


Med venlig hilsen / kind regards
- Morten Brørup

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port andnbsegments

[Thomas Monjalon]

12/07/2017 17:57, Morten Brørup:
> From: Stephen Hemminger
> > Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > > From: Yang, Zhiyong [mailto:zhiyong.yang@intel.com]
> > > > From: Morten Brørup
> > > > > From: Wiles, Keith
> > > > > > > On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon
> > > > > > >> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> > > > > > >>> Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > > > >>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first
> > > > > > >>>>> step would be to introduce a typedef for the port
> > > > > > >>>>> number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > > > > > >>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched
> > > > > > >>>>> to 16 bits in one step when everyone uses this new type.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing
> > > > > > >>>> the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind
> > > > > > >>>> typedefs. This has the unfortunate consequence that
> > > > > > >>>> when a variable type changes, it has to be changed everywhere.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the
> > > > > > >>>> same files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a
> > > > > > >>>> temporary solution will it be beneficial.
> > > > > > >> [...]
> > > > > > >>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument
> > > > > > >>> about type definitions was:
> > > > > > >>> When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type
> > > > > > >>> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too,
> > > > > > >>> including in the ethdev APIs.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the
> > > > > > >>> type of this variable.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> > > > > > >> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Note: I have no strong opinion.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I'm against the typedef because it would break convention,
> > > > > > > and I'm a strong proponent of conventions.
> > > > > > > In other projects, I'm all for typedefs, virtual classes,
> > > > > > > inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the Linux convention
> > > > > > > of not hiding simple types.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what
> > > > > > > we change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime
> > > > > > > in the future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first
> > > > > > one (if still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to
> > > > > > have more then 2 bytes would be to encode something into the
> > > > > > port id value, which I could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
> > > > > > > everywhere.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it
> > > > > > to be more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us
> > > > > > needing to change it again in the near future.
> > > > > > The only reason to make it a typedef is to be able to identify
> > > > > > from just the prototype of the function that it takes a port
> > > > > > ID value, which I am in favor of doing here for that reason.
> > > > >
> > > > > That is not a very good reason: When used as a function
> > > > > parameter, the type is only shown in the function declaration,
> > > > > whereas the variable name is shown every time it is used inside
> > > > > the function.
> > > > > So remember to always use meaningful variable names, such as
> > > > > "port" (like in the mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other
> > > > > places).
> > > > >
> > > > > I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it
> > > > > against the coding style, although after reviewing the official
> > > > > DPDK Coding Style documentation
> > > > > (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html),
> > > > > I can see that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note
> > > > > that section 1.5.7 of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says
> > > > > that the _t postfix should be avoided. Anyway, if we end up
> > > > > with a typedef, please don't use something resembling pid_t
> > > > > known from POSIX
> > > > > (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-
> > > > > Identification.html).
> > > >
> > > > How about rte_dev_id_t?
> > >
> > > If the DPDK Coding Style is based on Linux Coding Style, we should
> > > avoid typedefs in general, not just for structures. Please read Linus
> > > Torvalds' opinions about it:
> > > http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/typedefs.html
> > >
> > > Perhaps the DPDK Coding Style should be updated to clarify this. (Or
> > > if we decide otherwise, to explicitly mention this deviation from the
> > > Linux coding style.)
> > 
> > It is logical to use typedef's for this kind of scalar type that may
> > need to change.
> > Names matter, please avoid pid (confuse with posix) and  dev (confuse
> > with device id).
> > I would prefer: rte_portid_t and rte_queueid_t
> > 
> > Longer term, probably rte_eth_devices[] needs to go. Change port id
> > into something more like ifindex. And use sparse data structure to
> > allow very large number of devices and non-contiguous lookup. Think of
> > a VPN server where each VPN connection looks like a DPDK device.
> 
> We are using a non-contiguous ifindex in our firmware, for virtual
> interfaces as you mention, so I get your point here!
> But until DPDK gets there, I suppose the DPDK port id is considered
> more or less contiguous.
> 
> You clearly have a longer track record working with Linus than me,
> so if you interpret the coding style like that, I will not object
> anymore - as my objection was based on coding style. And will someone
> please update the DPDK Coding Style document accordingly...
> 
> rte_portid_t is fine with me, but why not just rte_port_t?

One problem with opaque typedef is that we don't know how to print them,
except if we have a PRIx macro.

So I suggest to keep with uint16_t (my preference),
or to add a printf format macro.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port andnbsegments

[Wiles, Keith]

> On Jul 12, 2017, at 11:23 AM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> 
> 12/07/2017 17:57, Morten Brørup:
>> From: Stephen Hemminger
>>> Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
>>>> From: Yang, Zhiyong [mailto:zhiyong.yang@intel.com]
>>>>> From: Morten Brørup
>>>>>> From: Wiles, Keith
>>>>>>>> On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup wrote:
>>>>>>>> From: Thomas Monjalon
>>>>>>>>> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
>>>>>>>>>> Morten Brørup wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first
>>>>>>>>>>>> step would be to introduce a typedef for the port
>>>>>>>>>>>> number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
>>>>>>>>>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched
>>>>>>>>>>>> to 16 bits in one step when everyone uses this new type.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing
>>>>>>>>>>> the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind
>>>>>>>>>>> typedefs. This has the unfortunate consequence that
>>>>>>>>>>> when a variable type changes, it has to be changed everywhere.
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the
>>>>>>>>>>> same files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a
>>>>>>>>>>> temporary solution will it be beneficial.
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument
>>>>>>>>>> about type definitions was:
>>>>>>>>>> When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type
>>>>>>>>>> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too,
>>>>>>>>>> including in the ethdev APIs.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the
>>>>>>>>>> type of this variable.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
>>>>>>>>> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Note: I have no strong opinion.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I'm against the typedef because it would break convention,
>>>>>>>> and I'm a strong proponent of conventions.
>>>>>>>> In other projects, I'm all for typedefs, virtual classes,
>>>>>>>> inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the Linux convention
>>>>>>>> of not hiding simple types.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what
>>>>>>>> we change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime
>>>>>>>> in the future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first
>>>>>>> one (if still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to
>>>>>>> have more then 2 bytes would be to encode something into the
>>>>>>> port id value, which I could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
>>>>>>>> everywhere.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it
>>>>>>> to be more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us
>>>>>>> needing to change it again in the near future.
>>>>>>> The only reason to make it a typedef is to be able to identify
>>>>>>> from just the prototype of the function that it takes a port
>>>>>>> ID value, which I am in favor of doing here for that reason.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That is not a very good reason: When used as a function
>>>>>> parameter, the type is only shown in the function declaration,
>>>>>> whereas the variable name is shown every time it is used inside
>>>>>> the function.
>>>>>> So remember to always use meaningful variable names, such as
>>>>>> "port" (like in the mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other
>>>>>> places).
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it
>>>>>> against the coding style, although after reviewing the official
>>>>>> DPDK Coding Style documentation
>>>>>> (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html),
>>>>>> I can see that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note
>>>>>> that section 1.5.7 of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says
>>>>>> that the _t postfix should be avoided. Anyway, if we end up
>>>>>> with a typedef, please don't use something resembling pid_t
>>>>>> known from POSIX
>>>>>> (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-
>>>>>> Identification.html).
>>>>> 
>>>>> How about rte_dev_id_t?
>>>> 
>>>> If the DPDK Coding Style is based on Linux Coding Style, we should
>>>> avoid typedefs in general, not just for structures. Please read Linus
>>>> Torvalds' opinions about it:
>>>> http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/typedefs.html
>>>> 
>>>> Perhaps the DPDK Coding Style should be updated to clarify this. (Or
>>>> if we decide otherwise, to explicitly mention this deviation from the
>>>> Linux coding style.)
>>> 
>>> It is logical to use typedef's for this kind of scalar type that may
>>> need to change.
>>> Names matter, please avoid pid (confuse with posix) and  dev (confuse
>>> with device id).
>>> I would prefer: rte_portid_t and rte_queueid_t
>>> 
>>> Longer term, probably rte_eth_devices[] needs to go. Change port id
>>> into something more like ifindex. And use sparse data structure to
>>> allow very large number of devices and non-contiguous lookup. Think of
>>> a VPN server where each VPN connection looks like a DPDK device.
>> 
>> We are using a non-contiguous ifindex in our firmware, for virtual
>> interfaces as you mention, so I get your point here!
>> But until DPDK gets there, I suppose the DPDK port id is considered
>> more or less contiguous.
>> 
>> You clearly have a longer track record working with Linus than me,
>> so if you interpret the coding style like that, I will not object
>> anymore - as my objection was based on coding style. And will someone
>> please update the DPDK Coding Style document accordingly...
>> 
>> rte_portid_t is fine with me, but why not just rte_port_t?
> 
> One problem with opaque typedef is that we don't know how to print them,
> except if we have a PRIx macro.
> 
> So I suggest to keep with uint16_t (my preference),
> or to add a printf format macro.

As in my previous email I think we have settled on uint16_t for the port and not a new typedef. Unless someone can define a compelling reason to use a new typedef.

Regards,
Keith

Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] mbuf: use 2 bytes for port andnbsegments

[Bruce Richardson]

On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 06:23:38PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 12/07/2017 17:57, Morten Brørup:
> > From: Stephen Hemminger
> > > Morten Brørup <mb@smartsharesystems.com> wrote:
> > > > From: Yang, Zhiyong [mailto:zhiyong.yang@intel.com]
> > > > > From: Morten Brørup
> > > > > > From: Wiles, Keith
> > > > > > > > On Jul 11, 2017, at 10:23 AM, Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon
> > > > > > > >> 11/07/2017 15:30, Morten Brørup:
> > > > > > > >>> Morten Brørup wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>> Olivier Matz wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>>> As I said in a previous message, I think a good first
> > > > > > > >>>>> step would be to introduce a typedef for the port
> > > > > > > >>>>> number: rte_eth_port_num_t.
> > > > > > > >>>>> It can still be uint8_t for now, and can be switched
> > > > > > > >>>>> to 16 bits in one step when everyone uses this new type.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> I think that DPDK follows the Linux tradition of exposing
> > > > > > > >>>> the variable types, as opposed to hiding them behind
> > > > > > > >>>> typedefs. This has the unfortunate consequence that
> > > > > > > >>>> when a variable type changes, it has to be changed everywhere.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> Introducing a rte_eth_port_num_t will require changing the
> > > > > > > >>>> same files at the same locations everywhere, so not even as a
> > > > > > > >>>> temporary solution will it be beneficial.
> > > > > > > >> [...]
> > > > > > > >>> What I was trying to communicate with my long argument
> > > > > > > >>> about type definitions was:
> > > > > > > >>> When the type changed from 8 bit to 16 bit, the type
> > > > > > > >>> needs to change from uint8_t to uint16_t everywhere too,
> > > > > > > >>> including in the ethdev APIs.
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Don't start breaking coding conventions here by hiding the
> > > > > > > >>> type of this variable.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> So, Morten, you are against the typedef, right?
> > > > > > > >> Because we need to change it everywhere anyway, right?
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Note: I have no strong opinion.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I'm against the typedef because it would break convention,
> > > > > > > > and I'm a strong proponent of conventions.
> > > > > > > > In other projects, I'm all for typedefs, virtual classes,
> > > > > > > > inheritance etc., but DPDK follows the Linux convention
> > > > > > > > of not hiding simple types.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We need to change it from uint8_t everywhere, regardless what
> > > > > > > > we change it to. (But if we need to change it again sometime
> > > > > > > > in the future, then a typedef will save us next time.)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If the number of ports go beyond 64K then I will be the first
> > > > > > > one (if still alive) to eat this email. :-) The only reason to
> > > > > > > have more then 2 bytes would be to encode something into the
> > > > > > > port id value, which I could see, but a very slim chance IMHO.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My preference: Follow convention and change it to uint16_t
> > > > > > > > everywhere.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As we must change the uint8_t to uint16_t, then I would like it
> > > > > > > to be more descriptive via a typedef. I really do not see us
> > > > > > > needing to change it again in the near future.
> > > > > > > The only reason to make it a typedef is to be able to identify
> > > > > > > from just the prototype of the function that it takes a port
> > > > > > > ID value, which I am in favor of doing here for that reason.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is not a very good reason: When used as a function
> > > > > > parameter, the type is only shown in the function declaration,
> > > > > > whereas the variable name is shown every time it is used inside
> > > > > > the function.
> > > > > > So remember to always use meaningful variable names, such as
> > > > > > "port" (like in the mbuf structure) or "port_id" (used in other
> > > > > > places).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I still don't support typedefs for scalar types. I consider it
> > > > > > against the coding style, although after reviewing the official
> > > > > > DPDK Coding Style documentation
> > > > > > (http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/coding_style.html),
> > > > > > I can see that it is not explicitly stated. Please also note
> > > > > > that section 1.5.7 of the DPDK Coding Style documentation says
> > > > > > that the _t postfix should be avoided. Anyway, if we end up
> > > > > > with a typedef, please don't use something resembling pid_t
> > > > > > known from POSIX
> > > > > > (https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Process-
> > > > > > Identification.html).
> > > > >
> > > > > How about rte_dev_id_t?
> > > >
> > > > If the DPDK Coding Style is based on Linux Coding Style, we should
> > > > avoid typedefs in general, not just for structures. Please read Linus
> > > > Torvalds' opinions about it:
> > > > http://yarchive.net/comp/linux/typedefs.html
> > > >
> > > > Perhaps the DPDK Coding Style should be updated to clarify this. (Or
> > > > if we decide otherwise, to explicitly mention this deviation from the
> > > > Linux coding style.)
> > > 
> > > It is logical to use typedef's for this kind of scalar type that may
> > > need to change.
> > > Names matter, please avoid pid (confuse with posix) and  dev (confuse
> > > with device id).
> > > I would prefer: rte_portid_t and rte_queueid_t
> > > 
> > > Longer term, probably rte_eth_devices[] needs to go. Change port id
> > > into something more like ifindex. And use sparse data structure to
> > > allow very large number of devices and non-contiguous lookup. Think of
> > > a VPN server where each VPN connection looks like a DPDK device.
> > 
> > We are using a non-contiguous ifindex in our firmware, for virtual
> > interfaces as you mention, so I get your point here!
> > But until DPDK gets there, I suppose the DPDK port id is considered
> > more or less contiguous.
> > 
> > You clearly have a longer track record working with Linus than me,
> > so if you interpret the coding style like that, I will not object
> > anymore - as my objection was based on coding style. And will someone
> > please update the DPDK Coding Style document accordingly...
> > 
> > rte_portid_t is fine with me, but why not just rte_port_t?
> 
> One problem with opaque typedef is that we don't know how to print them,
> except if we have a PRIx macro.
> 
> So I suggest to keep with uint16_t (my preference),
> or to add a printf format macro.

+1 for using basic types rather than typedefs.