From: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dkozlyuk@oss.nvidia.com>
To: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Matan Azrad <matan@oss.nvidia.com>,
Ori Kam <orika@oss.nvidia.com>,
NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"Ferruh Yigit" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/2] ethdev: add capability to keep indirect actions on restart
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 15:57:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CH0PR12MB50914B1A01F6DC9AB28D6D07B9B59@CH0PR12MB5091.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5b4d7e66-80f3-8099-2a81-ea6e20ec70ba@oktetlabs.ru>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
> Sent: 11 октября 2021 г. 16:58
> To: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dkozlyuk@nvidia.com>; Ajit Khaparde
> <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
> Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
> <orika@nvidia.com>; NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon
> <thomas@monjalon.net>; Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/2] ethdev: add capability to keep indirect
> actions on restart
>
> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
>
>
> On 10/7/21 11:16 AM, Dmitry Kozlyuk wrote:
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>
> >> Sent: 6 октября 2021 г. 20:13
> >> To: Dmitry Kozlyuk <dkozlyuk@nvidia.com>
> >> Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>; Ori Kam
> >> <orika@nvidia.com>; NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon
> >> <thomas@monjalon.net>; Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; Andrew
> >> Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/2] ethdev: add capability to
> >> keep indirect actions on restart
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 1:55 AM Dmitry Kozlyuk <dkozlyuk@nvidia.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> rte_flow_action_handle_create() did not mention what happens with an
> >>> indirect action when a device is stopped, possibly reconfigured, and
> >>> started again. It is natural for some indirect actions to be
> >>> persistent, like counters and meters; keeping others just saves
> >>> application time and complexity. However, not all PMDs can support it.
> >>> It is proposed to add a device capability to indicate if indirect
> >>> actions are kept across the above sequence or implicitly destroyed.
> >>>
> >>> It may happen that in the future a PMD acquires support for a type
> >>> of indirect actions that it cannot keep across a restart. It is
> >>> undesirable to stop advertising the capability so that applications
> >>> that don't use actions of the problematic type can still take advantage of it.
> >>> This is why PMDs are allowed to keep only a subset of indirect
> >>> actions provided that the vendor mandatorily documents it.
> >> Sorry - I am seeing this late.
> >> This could become confusing.
> >> May be it is better for the PMDs to specify which actions are persistent.
> >> How about adding a bit for the possible actions of interest.
> >> And then PMDs can set bits for actions which can be persistent across
> >> stop, start and reconfigurations?
> >
> > This approach was considered, but there is a risk of quickly running out of
> capability bits. Each action would consume one bit plus as many bits as there are
> special conditions for it in all the PMDs, because conditions are likely to be PMD-
> specific. And the application will anyway need to consider specific conditions to
> know which bit to test, so the meaning of the bits will be PMD-specific. On the
> other hand, PMDs are not expected to exercise this loophole unless absolutely
> needed.
> >
>
> May be we should separate at least transfer and non-transfer rules? Transfer
> rules are less configuration dependent.
Do you suggest splitting the bit from patch 1/2 in two?
Or did you mean indirect actions with only "transfer" bit set
and suggest splitting the bit from this patch in two?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-11 15:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-01 8:55 [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/2] Flow entities behavior across port restart Dmitry Kozlyuk
2021-09-01 8:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 1/2] ethdev: add capability to keep flow rules on restart Dmitry Kozlyuk
2021-09-01 8:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 2/2] ethdev: add capability to keep indirect actions " Dmitry Kozlyuk
2021-09-27 11:21 ` Dmitry Kozlyuk
2021-10-06 17:12 ` Ajit Khaparde
2021-10-07 8:16 ` Dmitry Kozlyuk
2021-10-11 13:58 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-10-11 15:53 ` Ori Kam
2021-10-12 9:15 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-10-12 10:26 ` Ori Kam
2021-10-12 10:41 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-10-13 8:36 ` Dmitry Kozlyuk
2021-10-11 15:57 ` Dmitry Kozlyuk [this message]
2021-10-05 17:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/2] Flow entities behavior across port restart Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CH0PR12MB50914B1A01F6DC9AB28D6D07B9B59@CH0PR12MB5091.namprd12.prod.outlook.com \
--to=dkozlyuk@oss.nvidia.com \
--cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=matan@oss.nvidia.com \
--cc=orika@oss.nvidia.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).