RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [v11 0/4] PCI Dev and SG copy support

[Gowrishankar Muthukrishnan <gmuthukrishn@marvell.com>]

Hi Fengchengwen

> Hi Gowrishankar,
> 
> On 2024/3/12 20:24, Gowrishankar Muthukrishnan wrote:
> > Hi Fengchengwen
> >
> >>
> >> Hi Thomas,
> >>
> >> On 2024/3/12 17:15, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> >>> 07/03/2024 14:55, Gowrishankar Muthukrishnan:
> >>>> Hi Fengchengwen,
> >>>>
> >>>>>> Waiting for a confirmation that this series is good to go.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In the discuss of thread [1], I hope this patchset continue take a
> >>>>> step forward (means new version) to support bi-direction test just
> >>>>> by
> >> modify config.ini file.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch set already exposes all configuration via config.ini. I
> >>>> didn't follow
> >> what is missing. For bi-direction, we can better continue discussing
> >> on that patch.
> >>>
> >>> Chengwen, please can you confirm whether you require a new version?
> >>> Which change exactly is missing?
> >>
> >> This patchset is OK with one sub-test only tackle one DMA direction.
> >>
> > Thanks for the confirmation.
> >
> >> But there is a later patch [1] which will support multiple DMA
> >> directions within one sub-test.
> >> it will add a entry "xfer_mode", but I think it complicate the test,
> >> I prefer we do more in this patchset to support some like
> >> bi-direction just by modify config.ini, some like this:
> >>
> > I think we should discuss about that in bi-directional patch series. This series
> is self-contained and there is no need to add bi-directional as part of this
> series. As far as this patch set is concerned, all the options are exposed via
> config.ini. Can you comment if there is anything missing, assuming that we are
> taking bi-directional support as a separate feature addition.
> 
> I have identified some improvements to the dma-perf app, and I plan to do it

It is unclear at this point what is the issue that you have with the app or this patch set. This series was first submitted on Aug 10 2023. You had acked v8 on Jan 25 2024. After the patches were acked, there were still review comments on variable renames etc, which were all addressed. The patches had been under review for more than 8 months with very slow progress.

> in 24.07, so if you don't mind, I will incorporate your commits (keeping your
> signed-off-by) and modify to the one that I described above, and then send to
> community (also with my improvements commits).

I would like to have this series merged first and not pulled into another series. We do have few other features that we would like to add on top. I would assume that you can also add your changes on top. To make contribution easier, isn't it better to accept at least this patch set (as you acked earlier) and then you can continue working on the improvements?

Thanks,
Gowrishankar

> 
> Thanks
> 
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Gowrishankar
> >
> >> 1. extend lcore_dma:
> >>    current lcore_dma is: lcore10@0000:00:04.2
> >>    extend it support:
> >> lcore10@0000:00:04.2,dir=m2d,coreid=1,pfid=2,vfid=3,raddr=0xXXXX
> >> 2. to fix one entry can't hold too many dma device, support entrys:
> >> lcore_dma_1, lcore_dma_2
> >>    which value is same with lcore_dma.
> >>
> >> So for bi-direction, we just define config.ini as:
> >>
> lcore_dma=lcore10@0000:00:04.2,dir=m2d,coreid=1,pfid=2,vfid=3,raddr=0
> >> x XXXX,
> >> lcore10@0000:00:04.2,dir=d2m,coreid=1,pfid=2,vfid=3,raddr=0xXXXX
> >>
> >> [1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-
> >> 3A__patches.dpdk.org_project_dpdk_patch_20240229141426.4188428-
> >> 2D1-2Damitprakashs-
> >> 40marvell.com_&d=DwICaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=EAtr-
> >>
> g7yUFhtOio8r2Rtm13Aqe4WVp_S_gHpcu6KFVo&m=DUaL_AJR1zqM0T2yw3
> >> aV44EObB90uqw5weFzSm-
> >>
> w39citSeGozNdEe4kzicss_KG&s=UTAcoZx5DjSJHyzxyLMxXz1bPqfPXQM7feDx
> >> ZdC6Jgk&e=
> >>
> >>>