DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>,
	"Horton, Remy" <remy.horton@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
	"Wu, Jingjing" <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
	"Zhang, Qi Z" <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>,
	"Xing, Beilei" <beilei.xing@intel.com>,
	Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:02:47 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2b3a2579-6bce-55f5-6e03-0974729cc95b@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2601191342CEEE43887BDE71AB9772589E28FD57@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com>

On 3/14/2018 6:53 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Ferruh Yigit
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 5:52 PM
>> To: Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>; Horton, Remy <remy.horton@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; Wu, Jingjing <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Zhang, Qi Z <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Xing, Beilei
>> <beilei.xing@intel.com>; Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters
>>
>> On 3/14/2018 5:23 PM, Shreyansh Jain wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ferruh Yigit [mailto:ferruh.yigit@intel.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 10:13 PM
>>>> To: Remy Horton <remy.horton@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>>> Cc: Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; Jingjing Wu
>>>> <jingjing.wu@intel.com>; Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>; Beilei Xing
>>>> <beilei.xing@intel.com>; Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>;
>>>> Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>>>> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-
>>>> tuned Tx/Rx parameters
>>>>
>>>> On 3/14/2018 3:48 PM, Remy Horton wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 14/03/2018 14:43, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>>  lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>>>>>  lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h | 15 +++++++++++++++
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you please remove deprecation notice in this patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Done.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> +	/* Defaults for drivers that don't implement preferred
>>>>>>> +	 * queue parameters.
>>>>> [..]
>>>>>> Not sure about having these defaults here. It is OK to have defaults
>>>> in driver,
>>>>>> in application or in config file, but I am not sure if putting them
>>>> into device
>>>>>> abstraction layer hides them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What about not providing any default in ethdev layer, and get zero
>>>> as invalid
>>>>>> when using them?
>>>>>
>>>>> This is something I have been thinking about, and I am going to
>>>> remove
>>>>> them for the V2. Original motive was to avoid breaking testpmd for
>>>> PMDs
>>>>> that don't give defaults (i.e. almost all of them). The alternative
>>>> is
>>>>> to put place-holders into all the PMDs themselves, but I am not sure
>>>> if
>>>>> this is appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> I think preferred values should be optional, PMD should have right to
>>>> not
>>>> provide any. Implementation in 4/4 forces preferred values, either in
>>>> all PMDs
>>>> or in ethdev layer.
>>>>
>>>> What about changing approach in application:
>>>>  is preferred value provided [1] ?
>>>>   yes => use it by sending value 0
>>>>   no => use application provided value, same as now, so control should
>>>> be in
>>>> application.
>>>>
>>>> I am aware this breaks the comfort of just providing 0 and PMD values
>>>> will be
>>>> used but covers the case there is no PMD values.
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>> it can be possible to check if preferred value provided by comparing 0,
>>>> but if 0
>>>> is a valid value that can be problem. It may not be problem with
>>>> current
>>>> variables but it may be when this struct extended, it may be good to
>>>> think about
>>>> alternative here.
>>>
>>> I don't think we should use the condition of "yes => use it by sending value 0". That is non-intuitive. Ideally, the application should query
>> and then if query responds with value as '0' (which can be valid for some variables in future), it sends its own value to setup functions
>> (whether '0' or something else, in case of 0 response, would depend on the knob).
>>
>> Right, at that stage application already knows what is the preferred value and
>> can directly use it.
>>
>>
>> Will it be too much to:
>>
>> 1) Adding a new field into "rte_eth_[rt]xconf" to say if exists prefer PMD
>> values. "prefer_device_values" ?
>> Application can provide values as usual, but if that field is set, abstraction
>> layer overwrites the application values with PMD preferred ones. If there is no
>> PMD preferred values continue using application ones.
>>
>>
>> 2) Add a bitwise "is_set" field to new "preferred_size" struct, which may show
>> status of other fields in the struct, if PMD set a valid value for them or not,
>> so won't have to rely on the 0 check.
> 
> That all seems like too much hassle for such small thing.

Fair enough.

> If we really want to allow PMD not to provide preferred values -
> then instead of adding rte_eth_dev_pref_info into dev_info we can simply
> introduce a new optional ethdev API call:
> rte_eth_get_pref_params() or so.
> If the PMD doesn’t want to provide preferred params to the user it simply
> wouldn't implement that function. 

Same can be done with updated rte_eth_dev_info.
Only application needs to check and use PMD preferred values, so this will mean
dropping "pass 0 to get preferred values" feature in initial set.

> 
> Konstantin
> 
>>
>>>
>>> Existing example applications should be changed for this. It is tedious, but gives a true example usage.
>>
>> Applications already needs to be updated to use this, important part is
>> modification is optional.
>>
>>>
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2018-03-14 21:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-07 12:08 [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 0/4] ethdev: add per-PMD tuning of RxTx parmeters Remy Horton
2018-03-07 12:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters Remy Horton
2018-03-14 12:28   ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-03-14 14:09     ` Remy Horton
2018-03-14 14:43   ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-14 15:10     ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-03-15  9:02       ` Remy Horton
2018-03-14 15:48     ` Remy Horton
2018-03-14 16:42       ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-14 17:23         ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-03-14 17:52           ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-14 18:53             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-03-14 21:02               ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2018-03-14 21:36                 ` Bruce Richardson
2018-03-15 13:57                   ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-15 14:39                     ` Bruce Richardson
2018-03-15 14:57                       ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-16 13:54                         ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-03-16 14:18                           ` Bruce Richardson
2018-03-16 15:36                           ` Remy Horton
2018-03-20 15:03                             ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-21 10:14                               ` Remy Horton
2018-03-21 13:56                                 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-20 14:54                           ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-21  6:51                             ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-03-21 10:02                               ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-21 10:45                                 ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-03-15 12:51                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-03-15 13:57                   ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-15 14:42                     ` Bruce Richardson
2018-03-07 12:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 2/4] net/e1000: add TxRx tuning parameters Remy Horton
2018-03-07 12:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 3/4] net/i40e: " Remy Horton
2018-03-07 12:08 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v1 4/4] testpmd: make use of per-PMD TxRx parameters Remy Horton
2018-03-21 14:27 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] ethdev: add per-PMD tuning of RxTx parmeters Remy Horton
2018-03-21 14:27   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters Remy Horton
2018-03-28  7:11     ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-03-30 15:40     ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-03-30 15:57       ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-03-31  0:46     ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-03-21 14:27   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/4] net/e1000: add TxRx tuning parameters Remy Horton
2018-03-21 14:27   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 3/4] net/i40e: " Remy Horton
2018-03-21 14:27   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 4/4] testpmd: make use of per-PMD TxRx parameters Remy Horton
2018-03-28  7:18     ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-04-03 11:00       ` Remy Horton
2018-03-31  0:01     ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-03  8:49       ` Remy Horton
2018-03-27 18:43   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 0/4] ethdev: add per-PMD tuning of RxTx parmeters Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-30 10:34     ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-03-31  0:05       ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-04 17:17   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 " Remy Horton
2018-04-04 17:17     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-04 18:56       ` De Lara Guarch, Pablo
2018-04-05 10:16         ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-04 17:17     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] net/e1000: add TxRx tuning parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-04 17:17     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] net/i40e: " Remy Horton
2018-04-04 17:17     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] testpmd: make use of per-PMD TxRx parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-06 14:49     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] ethdev: add per-PMD tuning of RxTx parmeters Remy Horton
2018-04-06 14:49       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-06 14:50       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/4] net/e1000: add TxRx tuning parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-06 14:50       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/4] net/i40e: " Remy Horton
2018-04-06 14:50       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/4] testpmd: make use of per-PMD TxRx parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-09 12:55         ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-04-09 14:38           ` Remy Horton
2018-04-10  4:18             ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-04-10  6:09               ` Remy Horton
2018-04-10  6:39                 ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-04-06 17:01       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/4] ethdev: add per-PMD tuning of RxTx parmeters Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-10  9:43       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 " Remy Horton
2018-04-10  9:43         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/4] ethdev: add support for PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-10  9:43         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/4] net/e1000: add TxRx tuning parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-10  9:43         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/4] net/i40e: " Remy Horton
2018-04-10  9:43         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 4/4] testpmd: make use of per-PMD TxRx parameters Remy Horton
2018-04-10 12:57         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/4] ethdev: add per-PMD tuning of RxTx parmeters Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-10 18:56         ` Ferruh Yigit

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=2b3a2579-6bce-55f5-6e03-0974729cc95b@intel.com \
    --to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=beilei.xing@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=remy.horton@intel.com \
    --cc=shreyansh.jain@nxp.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=wenzhuo.lu@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).