DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
	"Kulasek, TomaszX" <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for rte_eth_dev structure
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 23:11:34 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160727174133.GA22895@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB97725836B8884E@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 05:33:01PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jerin Jacob [mailto:jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2016 6:11 PM
> > To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> > Cc: Kulasek, TomaszX <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: announce ABI change for rte_eth_dev structure
> > 
> > On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 01:59:01AM -0700, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Tomasz Kulasek <tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > +* In 16.11 ABI changes are plained: the ``rte_eth_dev`` structure
> > > > > +will be
> > > > > +  extended with new function pointer ``tx_pkt_prep`` allowing
> > > > > +verification
> > > > > +  and processing of packet burst to meet HW specific requirements
> > > > > +before
> > > > > +  transmit. Also new fields will be added to the ``rte_eth_desc_lim`` structure:
> > > > > +  ``nb_seg_max`` and ``nb_mtu_seg_max`` provideing information
> > > > > +about number of
> > > > > +  segments limit to be transmitted by device for TSO/non-TSO packets.
> > > >
> > > > Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > >
> > > I think I understand you want to split the TX processing:
> > > 	1/ modify/write in mbufs
> > > 	2/ write in HW
> > > and let application decide:
> > > 	- where the TX prep is done (which core)
> > 
> > In what basics applications knows when and where to call tx_pkt_prep in fast path.
> > if all the time it needs to call before tx_burst then the PMD won't have/don't need this callback waste cycles in fast path.Is this the expected
> > behavior ?
> > Anything think it as compile time to make other PMDs wont suffer because of this change.
> 
> Not sure what suffering you are talking about...
> Current model - i.e. when application does preparations (or doesn't if none is required)
> on its own and just call tx_burst() would still be there.
> If the app doesn't want to use tx_prep() by some reason - that still ok,
> and decision is up to the particular app. 

So my question is in what basics application decides to call the preparation.
Can you tell me the use case in application perspective?
and what if the PMD does not implement that callback then it is of waste
cycles. Right?

Jerin


> Konstantin
> 
> > 
> > 
> > > 	- what to do if the TX prep fail
> > > So adding some processing in this first part becomes "not too
> > > expensive" or "manageable" from the application point of view.
> > >
> > > If I well understand the intent,
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> (except typos ;)

  reply	other threads:[~2016-07-27 17:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-20 14:24 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Tomasz Kulasek
2016-07-20 15:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-20 15:13   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-20 15:22     ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-20 15:42       ` Kulasek, TomaszX
2016-07-21 15:24 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Tomasz Kulasek
2016-07-21 22:48   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-27  8:59     ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-27 17:10       ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-27 17:33         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-27 17:41           ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
2016-07-27 20:51             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28  2:13               ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 10:36                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28 11:38                   ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 12:07                     ` Avi Kivity
2016-07-28 13:01                     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28 13:58                       ` Olivier MATZ
2016-07-28 14:21                         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2016-07-28 13:59                       ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 14:52                         ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-28 16:25                           ` Jerin Jacob
2016-07-28 17:07                             ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-07-31  7:50     ` Vlad Zolotarov
2016-07-28 12:04   ` Avi Kivity
2016-07-31  7:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] " Vlad Zolotarov
2016-07-31  8:10   ` Vlad Zolotarov

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=20160727174133.GA22895@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
    --cc=tomaszx.kulasek@intel.com \
    /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).