From: "Jiawei(Jonny) Wang" <jiaweiw@nvidia.com>
To: "NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Ori Kam <orika@nvidia.com>
Cc: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>,
Aman Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>,
Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com>,
Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>,
Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@nvidia.com>,
Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>,
"jerinj@marvell.com" <jerinj@marvell.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC 1/5] ethdev: add port affinity match item
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 14:00:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR12MB54513AD0054C05F5DFCCA61AC6C99@PH0PR12MB5451.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6248682.NeCsiYhmir@thomas>
Hi,
> > >
> > > 21/12/2022 11:29, Jiawei Wang:
> > > > + /**
> > > > + * Matches on the physical port affinity of the received packet.
> > > > + *
> > > > + * See struct rte_flow_item_port_affinity.
> > > > + */
> > > > + RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_PORT_AFFINITY,
> > > > };
> > >
> > > I'm not sure about the word "affinity".
> > > I think you want to match on a physical port.
> > > It could be a global physical port id or an index in the group of
> > > physical ports connected to a single DPDK port.
> > > In first case, the name of the item could be
> > > RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_PHY_PORT, in the second case, the name could be
> > > RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_MHPSDP_PHY_PORT,
> > > "MHPSDP" meaning "Multiple Hardware Ports - Single DPDK Port".
> > > We could replace "PHY" with "HW" as well.
> > >
> >
> > Since DPDK only probe/attach the single port, seems first case does not meet
> this case.
> > Here, 'affinity' stands for the packet association with actual physical port.
>
> I think it is more than affinity because the packet is effectively received from
> this port.
> And the other concern is that this name does not give any clue that we are
> talking about multiple ports merged in a single one.
>
RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_MHPSDP_HW_PORT is better? @Ori Kam WDYT?
> > > Note that we cannot use the new item
> > > RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_REPRESENTED_PORT
> > > because we are in a case where multiple hardware ports are merged in
> > > a single software represented port.
> > >
> > >
> > > [...]
> > > > +/**
> > > > + * @warning
> > > > + * @b EXPERIMENTAL: this structure may change without prior
> > > > +notice
> > > > + *
> > > > + * RTE_FLOW_ITEM_TYPE_PORT_AFFINITY
> > > > + *
> > > > + * For the multiple hardware ports connect to a single DPDK port
> > > > +(mhpsdp),
> > > > + * use this item to match the hardware port affinity of the packets.
> > > > + */
> > > > +struct rte_flow_item_port_affinity {
> > > > + uint8_t affinity; /**< port affinity value. */ };
> > >
> > > We need to define how the port numbering is done.
> > > Is it driver-dependent?
> > > Does it start at 0? etc...
> >
> > User can define any value they want; one use case is the packet could
> > be received and sent to same port, then they can set the same 'affinity' value
> in flow and queue configuration.
>
> No it does not work.
> If ports are numbered 1 and 2, and user thinks it is 0 and 1, the port 2 won't be
> matched at all.
>
OK, I can update the document the affinity 0 is no affinity in tx side and then match on affinity 0
will result an error.
For above case, user should use 1 and 2 to match.
> > The flow behavior is driver dependent.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-24 14:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-21 10:29 [RFC 0/5] add new port affinity item and affinity in Tx queue API Jiawei Wang
2022-12-21 10:29 ` [RFC 1/5] ethdev: add port affinity match item Jiawei Wang
2023-01-11 16:41 ` Ori Kam
2023-01-18 11:07 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-01-18 14:41 ` Jiawei(Jonny) Wang
2023-01-18 16:26 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-01-24 14:00 ` Jiawei(Jonny) Wang [this message]
2022-12-21 10:29 ` [RFC 2/5] ethdev: introduce the affinity field in Tx queue API Jiawei Wang
2023-01-11 16:47 ` Ori Kam
2023-01-18 11:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-01-18 14:44 ` Jiawei(Jonny) Wang
2023-01-18 16:31 ` Thomas Monjalon
2023-01-24 13:32 ` Jiawei(Jonny) Wang
2022-12-21 10:29 ` [RFC 3/5] drivers: add lag Rx port affinity in PRM Jiawei Wang
2022-12-21 10:29 ` [RFC 4/5] net/mlx5: add port affinity item support Jiawei Wang
2022-12-21 10:29 ` [RFC 5/5] drivers: enhance the Tx queue affinity Jiawei Wang
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=PH0PR12MB54513AD0054C05F5DFCCA61AC6C99@PH0PR12MB5451.namprd12.prod.outlook.com \
--to=jiaweiw@nvidia.com \
--cc=aman.deep.singh@intel.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
--cc=ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=orika@nvidia.com \
--cc=rasland@nvidia.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=viacheslavo@nvidia.com \
--cc=yuying.zhang@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).