From: Hanumanth Reddy Pothula <hpothula@marvell.com>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>,
Aman Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>,
Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
"andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru" <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>,
"thomas@monjalon.net" <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"yux.jiang@intel.com" <yux.jiang@intel.com>,
Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>,
Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 1/1] app/testpmd: add valid check to verify multi mempool feature
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 13:36:35 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <PH0PR18MB4750F7B565BC93FB871499E1CB0A9@PH0PR18MB4750.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3405bb67-9731-4b8c-2a52-1cd71ebe52d9@amd.com>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com>
> Sent: Monday, November 21, 2022 6:53 PM
> To: Hanumanth Reddy Pothula <hpothula@marvell.com>; Aman Singh
> <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>; Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru;
> thomas@monjalon.net; yux.jiang@intel.com; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran
> <jerinj@marvell.com>; Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram
> <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>
> Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 1/1] app/testpmd: add valid check to verify
> multi mempool feature
>
> External Email
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> On 11/21/2022 12:45 PM, Hanumanth Pothula wrote:
> > Validate ethdev parameter 'max_rx_mempools' to know whether device
> > supports multi-mempool feature or not.
> >
> > Also, add new testpmd command line argument, multi-mempool, to
> control
> > multi-mempool feature. By default its disabled.
> >
> > Bugzilla ID: 1128
> > Fixes: 4f04edcda769 ("app/testpmd: support multiple mbuf pools per Rx
> > queue")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hanumanth Pothula <hpothula@marvell.com>
> >
> > ---
> > v5:
> > - Added testpmd argument to enable multi-mempool feature.
> > - Simplified logic to distinguish between multi-mempool,
> > multi-segment and single pool/segment.
> > v4:
> > - updated if condition.
> > v3:
> > - Simplified conditional check.
> > - Corrected spell, whether.
> > v2:
> > - Rebased on tip of next-net/main.
> > ---
> > app/test-pmd/parameters.c | 3 ++
> > app/test-pmd/testpmd.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
> --
> > app/test-pmd/testpmd.h | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/parameters.c b/app/test-pmd/parameters.c
> > index aed4cdcb84..26d6450db4 100644
> > --- a/app/test-pmd/parameters.c
> > +++ b/app/test-pmd/parameters.c
> > @@ -700,6 +700,7 @@ launch_args_parse(int argc, char** argv)
> > { "rx-mq-mode", 1, 0, 0 },
> > { "record-core-cycles", 0, 0, 0 },
> > { "record-burst-stats", 0, 0, 0 },
> > + { "multi-mempool", 0, 0, 0 },
>
> Can you please group with relatet paramters, instead of appending end,
> after 'rxpkts' related parameters group (so after 'txpkts') can be good
> location since it is used for buffer split.
>
Ack
> need to document new argument on
> 'doc/guides/testpmd_app_ug/run_app.rst'
>
Ack
> Also need to add help string in 'usage()' function, again grouped in related
> paramters.
Sure, will add help string
>
> > { PARAM_NUM_PROCS, 1, 0, 0 },
> > { PARAM_PROC_ID, 1, 0, 0 },
> > { 0, 0, 0, 0 },
> > @@ -1449,6 +1450,8 @@ launch_args_parse(int argc, char** argv)
> > record_core_cycles = 1;
> > if (!strcmp(lgopts[opt_idx].name, "record-burst-
> stats"))
> > record_burst_stats = 1;
> > + if (!strcmp(lgopts[opt_idx].name, "multi-
> mempool"))
> > + multi_mempool = 1;
>
> Can you group with related paramters, same as above mentioned location?
>
Ack
> > if (!strcmp(lgopts[opt_idx].name,
> PARAM_NUM_PROCS))
> > num_procs = atoi(optarg);
> > if (!strcmp(lgopts[opt_idx].name,
> PARAM_PROC_ID)) diff --git
> > a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c index
> > 4e25f77c6a..9dfc4c9d0e 100644
> > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.c
> > @@ -497,6 +497,11 @@ uint8_t record_burst_stats;
> > */
> > uint32_t rxq_share;
> >
> > +/*
> > + * Multi-mempool support, disabled by default.
> > + */
> > +uint8_t multi_mempool;
>
> Can you put this after 'rx_pkt_nb_segs' related group.
>
Ack
> > +
> > unsigned int num_sockets = 0;
> > unsigned int socket_ids[RTE_MAX_NUMA_NODES];
> >
> > @@ -2655,28 +2660,23 @@ rx_queue_setup(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t
> rx_queue_id,
> > union rte_eth_rxseg rx_useg[MAX_SEGS_BUFFER_SPLIT] = {};
> > struct rte_mempool *rx_mempool[MAX_MEMPOOL] = {};
> > struct rte_mempool *mpx;
> > + struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info;
> > unsigned int i, mp_n;
> > uint32_t prev_hdrs = 0;
> > int ret;
> >
> > + ret = rte_eth_dev_info_get(port_id, &dev_info);
> > + if (ret != 0)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > /* Verify Rx queue configuration is single pool and segment or
> > * multiple pool/segment.
> > + * @see rte_eth_dev_info::max_rx_mempools
> > * @see rte_eth_rxconf::rx_mempools
> > * @see rte_eth_rxconf::rx_seg
> > */
>
> Is above comment block still valid?
Will remove
>
> > - if (!(mbuf_data_size_n > 1) && !(rx_pkt_nb_segs > 1 ||
> > - ((rx_conf->offloads & RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT) !=
> 0))) {
> > - /* Single pool/segment configuration */
> > - rx_conf->rx_seg = NULL;
> > - rx_conf->rx_nseg = 0;
> > - ret = rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(port_id, rx_queue_id,
> > - nb_rx_desc, socket_id,
> > - rx_conf, mp);
> > - goto exit;
> > - }
> > -
> > - if (rx_pkt_nb_segs > 1 ||
> > - rx_conf->offloads & RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT) {
> > + if ((rx_pkt_nb_segs > 1) &&
> > + (rx_conf->offloads & RTE_ETH_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT)) {
> > /* multi-segment configuration */
> > for (i = 0; i < rx_pkt_nb_segs; i++) {
> > struct rte_eth_rxseg_split *rx_seg =
> &rx_useg[i].split; @@ -2701,7
> > +2701,14 @@ rx_queue_setup(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t rx_queue_id,
> > }
> > rx_conf->rx_nseg = rx_pkt_nb_segs;
> > rx_conf->rx_seg = rx_useg;
> > - } else {
> > + rx_conf->rx_mempools = NULL;
> > + rx_conf->rx_nmempool = 0;
> > + ret = rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(port_id, rx_queue_id,
> nb_rx_desc,
> > + socket_id, rx_conf, NULL);
> > + rx_conf->rx_seg = NULL;
> > + rx_conf->rx_nseg = 0;
> > + } else if ((multi_mempool == 1) && (dev_info.max_rx_mempools !=
> 0) &&
> > + (mbuf_data_size_n > 1)) {
>
> What do you think to move 'rte_eth_dev_info_get()' within this if block,
> and reduce 'dev_info' scope, like
Ack
>
> else if (multi_mempool == 1)
> if (mbuf_data_size_n <= 1))
> log(describe problem)
> return
> struct rte_eth_dev_info dev_info;
> ret = rte_eth_dev_info_get(port_id, &dev_info);
> if (dev_info.max_rx_mempools == 0)
> log("device doesn't support requested config"
> return
> <multi-pool configuration>
> else
>
> > /* multi-pool configuration */
> > for (i = 0; i < mbuf_data_size_n; i++) {
> > mpx = mbuf_pool_find(socket_id, i);
>
> Where the mempools are created? Is that code also needs to be updated to
> use/check 'multi_mempool' variable/config?
I think it's not required, as user might create multiple pools for other scenarios as well, for example as part of buzilla id: 1128, user creating two pools but not for multi-mempool feature.
./x86_64-native-linuxapp-gcc/app/dpdk-testpmd -l 5,6 -n 8 --force-max-simd-bitwidth=64 -- -i --portmask=0x3 --rxq=1 --txq=1 --txd=1024 --rxd=1024 --nb-cores=1 --mbuf-size=2048,2048
>
> > @@ -2709,14 +2716,23 @@ rx_queue_setup(uint16_t port_id, uint16_t
> rx_queue_id,
> > }
> > rx_conf->rx_mempools = rx_mempool;
> > rx_conf->rx_nmempool = mbuf_data_size_n;
> > - }
> > - ret = rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(port_id, rx_queue_id, nb_rx_desc,
> > + rx_conf->rx_seg = NULL;
> > + rx_conf->rx_nseg = 0;
> > + ret = rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(port_id, rx_queue_id,
> nb_rx_desc,
> > socket_id, rx_conf, NULL);
> > - rx_conf->rx_seg = NULL;
> > - rx_conf->rx_nseg = 0;
> > - rx_conf->rx_mempools = NULL;
> > - rx_conf->rx_nmempool = 0;
> > -exit:
> > + rx_conf->rx_mempools = NULL;
> > + rx_conf->rx_nmempool = 0;
> > + } else {
> > + /* Single pool/segment configuration */
> > + rx_conf->rx_seg = NULL;
> > + rx_conf->rx_nseg = 0;
> > + rx_conf->rx_mempools = NULL;
> > + rx_conf->rx_nmempool = 0;
> > + ret = rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(port_id, rx_queue_id,
> nb_rx_desc,
> > + socket_id, rx_conf, mp);
> > + }
> > +
> > +
> > ports[port_id].rxq[rx_queue_id].state = rx_conf->rx_deferred_start
> ?
> >
> RTE_ETH_QUEUE_STATE_STOPPED :
> >
> RTE_ETH_QUEUE_STATE_STARTED;
> > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h index
> > aaf69c349a..9472a2cb19 100644
> > --- a/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
> > +++ b/app/test-pmd/testpmd.h
> > @@ -464,6 +464,7 @@ enum dcb_mode_enable extern uint8_t
> > xstats_hide_zero; /**< Hide zero values for xstats display */
> >
> > /* globals used for configuration */
> > +extern uint8_t multi_mempool; /**< Enables multi-mempool feature.
> */
>
> Again please group this same location as done in .c file
Ack.
>
> > extern uint8_t record_core_cycles; /**< Enables measurement of CPU
> > cycles */ extern uint8_t record_burst_stats; /**< Enables display of
> > RX and TX bursts */ extern uint16_t verbose_level; /**< Drives messages
> being displayed, if any. */
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-21 13:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-17 11:30 [PATCH v1 " Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-17 12:55 ` [PATCH v2 " Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-17 15:00 ` Singh, Aman Deep
2022-11-17 15:58 ` [EXT] " Hanumanth Reddy Pothula
2022-11-17 16:03 ` [PATCH v3 " Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-17 23:36 ` Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-18 6:51 ` Han, YingyaX
2022-11-18 11:37 ` Hanumanth Reddy Pothula
2022-11-18 11:13 ` Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-18 14:13 ` [PATCH v4 " Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-18 20:56 ` Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-19 0:00 ` [EXT] " Hanumanth Reddy Pothula
2022-11-21 10:08 ` Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-21 10:44 ` Hanumanth Reddy Pothula
2022-11-21 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 " Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-21 13:22 ` Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-21 13:36 ` Hanumanth Reddy Pothula [this message]
2022-11-21 14:10 ` [EXT] " Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-21 14:33 ` [PATCH v6 " Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-21 17:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-21 17:45 ` [EXT] " Hanumanth Reddy Pothula
2022-11-21 18:05 ` Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-21 18:07 ` [PATCH v7 " Hanumanth Pothula
2022-11-21 18:40 ` Ferruh Yigit
2022-11-22 6:42 ` Han, YingyaX
2022-11-22 6:52 ` Tang, Yaqi
2022-11-22 8:33 ` 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=PH0PR18MB4750F7B565BC93FB871499E1CB0A9@PH0PR18MB4750.namprd18.prod.outlook.com \
--to=hpothula@marvell.com \
--cc=aman.deep.singh@intel.com \
--cc=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@amd.com \
--cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
--cc=ndabilpuram@marvell.com \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=yux.jiang@intel.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).