From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: santosh <santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net,
jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] ethdev: get the supported pools for a port
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:32:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170929083242.a4arzpf2drfqyxpj@platinum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8b832367-e8fa-077a-1732-50627e977f9c@caviumnetworks.com>
On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 10:52:31PM +0100, santosh wrote:
> Hi Olivier,
>
>
> On Monday 25 September 2017 08:37 AM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 08:48:37PM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote:
> >> Now that dpdk supports more than one mempool drivers and
> >> each mempool driver works best for specific PMD, example:
> >> - sw ring based mempool for Intel PMD drivers.
> >> - dpaa2 HW mempool manager for dpaa2 PMD driver.
> >> - fpa HW mempool manager for Octeontx PMD driver.
> >>
> >> Application would like to know the best mempool handle
> >> for any port.
> >>
> >> Introducing rte_eth_dev_pools_ops_supported() API,
> >> which allows PMD driver to advertise
> >> his supported pools capability to the application.
> >>
> >> Supported pools are categorized in below priority:-
> >> - Best mempool handle for this port (Highest priority '0')
> >> - Port supports this mempool handle (Priority '1')
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla <santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com>
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> +int
> >> +rte_eth_dev_pools_ops_supported(uint8_t port_id, const char *pool)
> > pools -> pool?
>
> ok.
>
> >> +{
> >> + struct rte_eth_dev *dev;
> >> + const char *tmp;
> >> +
> >> + RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV);
> >> +
> >> + if (pool == NULL)
> >> + return -EINVAL;
> >> +
> >> + dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id];
> >> +
> >> + if (*dev->dev_ops->pools_ops_supported == NULL) {
> >> + tmp = rte_eal_mbuf_default_mempool_ops();
> >> + if (!strcmp(tmp, pool))
> >> + return 0;
> >> + else
> >> + return -ENOTSUP;
> > I don't understand why we are comparing with
> > rte_eal_mbuf_default_mempool_ops().
> >
> > It means that the result of the function would be influenced
> > by the parameter given by the user.
>
> But that will be only for ops not supported case and in that case,
> function _must_ make sure that if inputted param is _default_ops_name
> then function should return ops supported correct info (whether
> returning '0' : Best ops or '1': ops does support
> , this part is arguable.. meaning One can say that default_ops ='handle-name' is best possible handle Or
> one of handle which platform supports).
>
> > I think that a PMD that does not implement ->pools_ops_supported
> > should always return 1 (mempool is supported).
>
I don't agree.
The result of this API (mempool ops supported or not by a PMD)
should not depend on what user asks for.
> Return 1 says: PMD support this ops..
>
> So if ops is not supported and func returns with 1, then which ops application will use?
> If that ops is default_ops.. then How application will distinguish when to use default ops or
> param ops?.. as because in both cases func will return with value 1.
>
> The approach in the patch takes care of that condition and func will return -ENOTSUP
> if (ops not support || inputted param not matching with default ops) otherwise will return
> 0 or 1.
>
> At application side;
> For error case: In case of -ENOTSUP, its upto application to use _default_ops or exit.
> For good case: 0 or 1 case, func gaurantee that handle is either best handle for pool or pool supports
> that handle.. However in your suggestion if ops not supported case returns 1 then application is not
> sure which ops to use.. default_ops Or input ops given to func.
>
> make sense?
My proposition is:
- what a PMD returns does not depend on used parameter:
- 0: best support
- 1: support
- -ENOTSUP: not supported
- if a PMD does not implement the _ops_supported() API, assume all pools
are supported (returns 1)
- if the user does not pass a specific mempool ops, the application asks
the PMDs, finds the best mempool ops, and use it. This could even be
done in rte_pktmbuf_pool_create() as discussed at the summit.
- if the user passes a specific mempool ops, we don't need to call the
_ops_supported() api, we just try to use this pool.
The _ops_supported() returns a property of a PMD, in my opinion it
should not be impacted by a user argument.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-29 8:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-01 8:05 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] Allow application set mempool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-06-01 8:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] eal: Introducing option to " Santosh Shukla
2017-06-30 14:12 ` Olivier Matz
2017-07-04 12:33 ` santosh
2017-06-01 8:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] ether/ethdev: Allow pmd to advertise preferred pool capability Santosh Shukla
2017-06-30 14:13 ` Olivier Matz
2017-07-04 12:39 ` santosh
2017-07-04 13:07 ` Olivier Matz
2017-07-04 14:12 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-06-19 11:52 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] Allow application set mempool handle Hemant Agrawal
2017-06-19 13:01 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-06-20 10:37 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-06-20 14:04 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-06-30 14:12 ` Olivier Matz
2017-07-04 12:25 ` santosh
2017-07-04 15:59 ` Olivier Matz
2017-07-05 7:48 ` santosh
2017-07-20 7:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/2] Dynamically configure " Santosh Shukla
2017-07-20 7:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] eal: allow user to override default pool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-08-15 8:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] Dynamically configure mempool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-08-15 8:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/2] eal: allow user to override default pool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-09-04 11:46 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-07 9:25 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-08-15 8:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/2] ethdev: allow pmd to advertise " Santosh Shukla
2017-09-04 12:11 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-04 13:14 ` santosh
2017-09-07 9:21 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-09-07 10:06 ` santosh
2017-09-07 10:11 ` santosh
2017-09-07 11:08 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-09-11 9:33 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-11 12:40 ` santosh
2017-09-11 13:00 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-04 9:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 0/2] Dynamically configure mempool handle Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
2017-09-04 13:20 ` santosh
2017-09-04 13:34 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-04 14:24 ` Sergio Gonzalez Monroy
2017-09-05 7:47 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-05 8:11 ` Jerin Jacob
2017-09-11 15:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Santosh Shukla
2017-09-11 15:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/2] eal: allow user to override default pool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-09-25 7:28 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-25 21:23 ` santosh
2017-09-11 15:18 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] ethdev: get the supported pools for a port Santosh Shukla
2017-09-25 7:37 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-25 21:52 ` santosh
2017-09-29 5:00 ` santosh
2017-09-29 8:32 ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2017-09-29 10:16 ` santosh
2017-09-29 11:21 ` santosh
2017-09-29 11:23 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-29 11:31 ` santosh
2017-09-13 10:00 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/2] Dynamically configure mempool handle santosh
2017-09-19 8:28 ` santosh
2017-09-25 7:24 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-09-25 21:58 ` santosh
2017-10-01 9:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 " Santosh Shukla
2017-10-01 9:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/2] eal: allow user to override default pool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-10-02 14:29 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-10-06 0:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-10-06 3:31 ` santosh
2017-10-06 8:39 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-10-06 7:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/2] Dynamically configure mempool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-10-06 7:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/2] eal: allow user to override default pool handle Santosh Shukla
2017-10-06 7:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/2] ethdev: get the supported pool for a port Santosh Shukla
2017-10-06 18:58 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/2] Dynamically configure mempool handle Thomas Monjalon
2017-10-01 9:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] ethdev: get the supported pool for a port Santosh Shukla
2017-10-02 14:31 ` Olivier MATZ
2017-10-06 0:30 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-10-06 3:32 ` santosh
2017-10-02 8:37 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/2] Dynamically configure mempool handle santosh
2017-07-20 7:06 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] ethdev: allow pmd to advertise pool handle Santosh Shukla
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=20170929083242.a4arzpf2drfqyxpj@platinum \
--to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
--cc=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.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).