From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E881BE88 for ; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:18:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18A985BCD2; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:18:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.112.39] (ovpn-112-39.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.39]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C1131C5B3; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:18:16 +0000 (UTC) To: Marvin Liu , tiwei.bie@intel.com Cc: zhihong.wang@intel.com, dev@dpdk.org References: <20180625151710.29437-1-yong.liu@intel.com> <20180625151710.29437-7-yong.liu@intel.com> From: Maxime Coquelin Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:18:15 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180625151710.29437-7-yong.liu@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.11.54.5 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.1]); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:18:19 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: inspected by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.11.55.1]); Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:18:19 +0000 (UTC) for IP:'10.11.54.5' DOMAIN:'int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com' HELO:'smtp.corp.redhat.com' FROM:'maxime.coquelin@redhat.com' RCPT:'' Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 6/8] net/virtio: support IN_ORDER Rx and Tx 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: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 08:18:20 -0000 On 06/25/2018 05:17 PM, Marvin Liu wrote: > IN_ORDER Rx function can support merge-able feature. Descriptors My understanding of the code is that IN_ORDER Rx function only supports mergeable feature (and it seems to be confirmed by patch 7). So maybe change the text to: "IN_ORDER Rx function requires merge-able feature." > allocation and free will be done in bulk. > > Virtio dequeue logic: > dequeue_burst_rx(burst mbufs) > for (each mbuf b) { > if (b need merge) { > merge remained mbufs > add merged mbuf to return mbufs list > } else { > add mbuf to return mbufs list > } > } > if (last mbuf c need merge) { > dequeue_burst_rx(required mbufs) > merge last mbuf c > } > refill_avail_ring_bulk() > update_avail_ring() > return mbufs list > > IN_ORDER Tx function can support offloading features. Packets can't be s/can support/supports/ > transmitted by IN_ORDER Tx will be handled by normal Tx. Can you clarify why some packets can't be transmitted by IN_ORDER Tx? > Virtio enqueue logic: > xmit_cleanup(used descs) > for (each xmit mbuf b) { > if (b can inorder xmit) { > add mbuf b to inorder burst list > continue > } else { > xmit inorder burst list > xmit mbuf b with normal xmit > } > } > if (inorder burst list not empty) { > xmit inorder burst list > } > update_avail_ring() > > Signed-off-by: Marvin Liu > Other than above clarification needed, the code looks good to me. Thanks, Maxime