From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
To: Reshma Pattan <reshma.pattan@intel.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/2] librte_ether: add new fields to rte_eth_dev_info struct
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2016 12:36:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2916536.igaxvufRMN@xps13> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1460627077-8207-3-git-send-email-reshma.pattan@intel.com>
2016-04-14 10:44, Reshma Pattan:
> --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h
> @@ -908,6 +908,9 @@ struct rte_eth_dev_info {
> struct rte_eth_desc_lim rx_desc_lim; /**< RX descriptors limits */
> struct rte_eth_desc_lim tx_desc_lim; /**< TX descriptors limits */
> uint32_t speed_capa; /**< Supported speeds bitmap (ETH_LINK_SPEED_). */
> + /** number of queues configured by software*/
> + uint16_t nb_rx_queues; /**< Number of RX queues. */
> + uint16_t nb_tx_queues; /**< Number of TX queues. */
> };
I think the ethdev design is strange for these structures.
struct rte_eth_dev is internal to be used inside the ethdev API
or by the drivers.
It contains struct rte_eth_dev_data which can be of interest for
the application, except the dev_private part (which could be
directly in struct rte_eth_dev).
So the global question is: how to share the device data with the
application?
Instead of giving a pointer or a copy of struct rte_eth_dev_data,
we have some different accessors:
- rte_eth_dev_info_get() with a specific struct rte_eth_dev_info
which gathers a lot of info, not only from struct rte_eth_dev_data
- rte_eth_macaddr_get()
- rte_eth_dev_socket_id()
- rte_eth_link_get() which is more than an accessor
I think having some specialized accessors is good.
But the rte_eth_dev_info_get() looks like to be a big request
without precise goal and going to break ABI really often.
There are some queues informations, some (not so precise)
offload capabilities, some steering (RSS/VMDq) informations,
the default configuration of some Intel NIC thresholds,
the speed capabilities, etc.
Shouldn't we try to streamline this API?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-15 10:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-14 9:44 [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/2] add new fields to rte_eth_dev_info structure Reshma Pattan
2016-04-14 9:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/2] doc: announce ABI change for " Reshma Pattan
2016-04-15 9:42 ` Mcnamara, John
2016-04-15 10:02 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-04-14 9:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/2] librte_ether: add new fields to rte_eth_dev_info struct Reshma Pattan
2016-04-15 9:42 ` Mcnamara, John
2016-04-15 10:36 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2016-04-15 11:32 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
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=2916536.igaxvufRMN@xps13 \
--to=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=reshma.pattan@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).