DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>
To: "Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)" <hyonkim@cisco.com>,
	Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>,
	David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
	"Thomas Monjalon" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
	Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
	"Bruce Richardson" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Cc: "John Daley (johndale)" <johndale@cisco.com>,
	Shahed Shaikh <shshaikh@marvell.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 2/3] eal: add mask and unmask interrupt APIs
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 09:20:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BYAPR18MB24244A2FD8DA4DFF573C5D20C8C90@BYAPR18MB2424.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR11MB18395EC11DFB036797408BFCBFC90@MWHPR11MB1839.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

> > > Not sure. I do not have a good suggestion here :-) Like to hear from
> > > David when he comes back, as he spent most time on this issue..
> >
> > Sure. He is on vacation.
> > Any reason for thinking, rte_intr_ack()  may not be semantically correct?
> > I think, it is very much correct if there are no better suggestions.
> > Anyway it the name, From VFIO perspective, we know what is expected so
> > I think it is fine.
> >
> > >
> > > Why not return -1 and let the caller deal with it?
> >
> > If we make it as rte_intr_ack() no need to return -1 for
> > MSIX-VFIO+Linux as it is semantically correct.
> >
> 
> Ack can be ambiguous. For INTx, ack usually means PIO to a NIC register,
> saying "I got your interrupt, please de-assert irq".

I think, it vary from the perspective of IRQ Chip(or controller) vs NIC register(Source) PoV.
Since the API starts from rte_intr_* it is more of controller so _ack_ make sense
Other reason for ack:
1) It will enforce that it needs to be called form ISR
2) It would be have been really correct to unmask if VFIO+MSIx+Linux supports
it
3) if it is ack, no need to add unmask counterpart, the _mask_ API

> 
> Besides the name, are we agreeing that we want these?
> - Unmask if INTx

Yes

> - Nothing if MSI/MSI-X
Yes for MSI over VFIO
No for MSI over UIO/igb_uio

I don't  have very strong opinion unmask vs ack. I prefer to have ack due the reasons stated above.
If you really have strong opinion on using unmask, we will stick with that to make forward progress.
Let us know.


> 
> So, really just "unmask if INTx". I am ok with rte_intr_unmask() if we make
> this intention clear. rte_unmask_if_intx() looks messy.
> 
> Thanks..
> -Hyong

  reply	other threads:[~2019-07-17  9:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-15 16:50 [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH] vfio: avoid re-installing irq handler Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-07-16  5:58 ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-16  6:47   ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-07-16  7:49     ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-16  9:56       ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-07-16  6:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH] eal: add mask and unmask interrupt apis Nithin Dabilpuram
2019-07-16  7:01 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v2] " Nithin Dabilpuram
2019-07-16 16:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 1/3] vfio: revert change that does intr eventfd setup at probe Nithin Dabilpuram
2019-07-16 16:44   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 2/3] eal: add mask and unmask interrupt APIs Nithin Dabilpuram
2019-07-17  5:55     ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-17  6:14       ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-07-17  7:09         ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-17  8:03           ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-07-17  8:45             ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-17  9:20               ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran [this message]
2019-07-17  9:51                 ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-17 10:43                   ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-07-17 11:06                     ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-17 11:16                       ` Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
2019-07-17 12:04                         ` Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram
2019-07-16 16:44   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 3/3] drivers/net: use unmask API in interrupt handlers Nithin Dabilpuram
2019-07-17  6:01     ` Hyong Youb Kim (hyonkim)
2019-07-17  7:47       ` Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram
2019-07-16 20:06   ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC PATCH v3 1/3] vfio: revert change that does intr eventfd setup at probe Stephen Hemminger

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=BYAPR18MB24244A2FD8DA4DFF573C5D20C8C90@BYAPR18MB2424.namprd18.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=hyonkim@cisco.com \
    --cc=johndale@cisco.com \
    --cc=ndabilpuram@marvell.com \
    --cc=shshaikh@marvell.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).