From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6175AA04B5; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:10:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA8A3CD2E; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:10:00 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga12.intel.com (mga12.intel.com [192.55.52.136]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84283CD2D for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 14:09:58 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: ac3nYVSjwzWTzGKdC/wZZro2prf3UakVUXtXchtVAMnqiz3IzjRhCVZNBUW+I/XM0Kp8saCouh NBMZv8PAZplQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9788"; a="147709108" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,430,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="147709108" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga005.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.41]) by fmsmga106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Oct 2020 06:09:51 -0700 IronPort-SDR: rf+k7W60ZE8+zR6qLArCKYB3Vc/+ZEx3rwEIbZjodfoUuYBdUUmRyvRN6qIWNhzS6PvqPKrkq0 BtOItq6GhJNw== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,430,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="536665050" Received: from fyigit-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.213.251.183]) ([10.213.251.183]) by orsmga005-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Oct 2020 06:09:49 -0700 To: Slava Ovsiienko , Raslan Darawsheh , "dev@dpdk.org" Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon , Matan Azrad , Alexander Kozyrev , Ori Kam References: <1603381371-5360-2-git-send-email-viacheslavo@nvidia.com> <1603713305-30991-1-git-send-email-viacheslavo@nvidia.com> <3e0a7114-87d1-99fc-f8b6-6a94e339f4e3@intel.com> From: Ferruh Yigit Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 13:09:45 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 10/27/2020 7:05 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ferruh Yigit >> Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2020 13:05 >> To: Slava Ovsiienko ; Raslan Darawsheh >> ; dev@dpdk.org >> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon ; Matan Azrad >> ; Alexander Kozyrev ; Ori Kam >> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support >> >> On 10/26/2020 5:38 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote: >>> Hi, Ferruh >>> >>> PSB >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Ferruh Yigit >>>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 19:04 >>>> To: Raslan Darawsheh ; Slava Ovsiienko >>>> ; dev@dpdk.org >>>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon ; Matan Azrad >>>> ; Alexander Kozyrev ; Ori Kam >>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split >>>> support >>>> >>>> On 10/26/2020 3:25 PM, Raslan Darawsheh wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Viacheslav Ovsiienko >>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 1:55 PM >>>>>> To: dev@dpdk.org >>>>>> Cc: NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon ; Matan >> Azrad >>>>>> ; Alexander Kozyrev ; >> Raslan >>>>>> Darawsheh ; Ori Kam >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH v4 0/6] net/mlx5: add Rx buffer split support >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch adds to PMD the functionality for the receiving buffer >>>>>> split feasture [1] >>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa >>>>>> tc >>>>>> h >>>> >> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81154%2F&data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid >>>>>> >>>> >> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db >>>> 3 >>>>>> >>>> >> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&sdata=fyiL3PS8r8wv8u >>>>>> pyOYUtITkVqId9DZsF9LvSJQL9fdM%3D&reserved=0 >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko >>>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> v1: >>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa >>>>>> tc >>>>>> h >>>> >> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81808%2F&data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid >>>>>> >>>> >> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db >>>> 3 >>>>>> >>>> >> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&sdata=NPBFlGmVN6bi >>>>>> GUpzHC%2FrOVmdMoK2fkYRC0%2FDB%2BNlNno%3D&reserved=0 >>>>>> >>>>>> v2: >>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa >>>>>> tc >>>>>> h >>>> >> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F81923%2F&data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid >>>>>> >>>> >> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db >>>> 3 >>>>>> >>>> >> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&sdata=YwYjMz3jrSYU6 >>>>>> RBgwl0DmQfmjwwymNJTFjMdx0rsm2U%3D&reserved=0 >>>>>> - typos >>>>>> - documentation is updated >>>>>> >>>>>> v3: >>>>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fpa >>>>>> tc >>>>>> h >>>> >> es.dpdk.org%2Fpatch%2F82177%2F&data=02%7C01%7Crasland%40nvid >>>>>> >>>> >> ia.com%7Ccf4913c6b58346b50b1b08d879a60608%7C43083d15727340c1b7db >>>> 3 >>>>>> >>>> >> 9efd9ccc17a%7C0%7C0%7C637393101256743078&sdata=HVvLbWS0sJxu >>>>>> v%2Bc%2BKIMqllBq3edC4v0GD%2BtrwS7%2FsRo%3D&reserved=0 >>>>>> - extra parameter checks in PMD rx_queue_setup removed >>>>>> - minor optimizations in PMD >>>>>> >>>>>> v4: - rebasing >>>>>> >>>>>> Viacheslav Ovsiienko (6): >>>>>> net/mlx5: add extended Rx queue setup routine >>>>>> net/mlx5: configure Rx queue to support split >>>>>> net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue >>>>>> net/mlx5: update Rx datapath to support split >>>>>> net/mlx5: report Rx segmentation capabilities >>>>>> doc: add buffer split feature limitation to mlx5 guide >>>>>> >>>>>> doc/guides/nics/mlx5.rst | 6 +- >>>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5.h | 3 + >>>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_ethdev.c | 4 ++ >>>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_mr.c | 3 + >>>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxq.c | 136 >>>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- >>>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.c | 3 +- >>>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_rxtx.h | 13 +++- >>>>>> drivers/net/mlx5/mlx5_trigger.c | 20 +++--- >>>>>> 8 files changed, 160 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 1.8.3.1 >>>>> >>>>> Series applied to next-net-mlx, >>>>> >>>> >>>> The feature was references with different name in each commit, I >>>> tried to unify it as "Rx buffer split" in next-net. >>>> Can you please double check the updated commit log/titles? >>> >>>>> doc: add Rx buffer split limitation to mlx5 guide >>>>> net/mlx5: report Rx buffer split capabilities >>> OK about above. >>> >>>>> net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split >>> It would be better: "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split on datapath >>> >> >> Isn't the supporting the "Rx buffer split" mean supporting it on the datapath, >> where else it can be supported, the "on datapath" looks redundant to me. > > Options for possible "support Buffer Split" meaning: > - generic PMD configuration > - queue configuration > - reporting caps > - datapath > > The series is split for commits those updating the very specific parts in PMD. > We may drop this specifics but we would lose the series split meaning. > Sure, the entire series is about "support Rx buffer split", but each commit has > its own clarification in the headline. > >> >>>>> net/mlx5: register multiple pool for Rx queue >>> OK >>> >>>>> net/mlx5: configure Rx buffer split >>> It would be better: "net/mlx5: configure Rx queue for buffer split" >>> >> >> Like above, isn't the configure "Rx buffer split" mean configuring Rx queue for >> it, "Rx queue" looks redundant to me. > It just emphasizes - "the queue object is configured in this specific commit", > it would be easier to find this point and understand what it is in the long git log. > Hence, in my opinion, "queue" is some kind of extra clue, we should not drop it. > >> For both above, if you have strong opinion to update them, I can. But I prefer >> shorter versions. >> > >>>>> net/mlx5: receive Rx buffer split description >>> IMO, it would be better: "net/mlx5: handle Rx buffer split description" >>> or >>> "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description" >>> >> >> OK to use "net/mlx5: support Rx buffer split description" >> > Please, see dpdk-next-net-mlx - Raslan updated the subtree, addressing > the hotfix and yours and mine comments. > What to see in the sub-tree? Making changes is easy, the essence is discussion and reaching into a consensus, which is what I am trying to do, without a consensus what is the point of updating it in the mlx sub-tree?