From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>,
Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>,
Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
"jerinjacobk@gmail.com" <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>,
"stephen@networkplumber.org" <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
"ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com" <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>,
"maxime.coquelin@redhat.com" <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
"olivier.matz@6wind.com" <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
"david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 17:43:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a5f7815f-4e28-56e3-3866-c64c8ea849ff@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AM4PR05MB3265A12E447C5229B40857A6D2480@AM4PR05MB3265.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
On 8/6/2020 5:39 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 19:37
>> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>; Andrew Rybchenko
>> <arybchenko@solarflare.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>> Cc: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>; Raslan Darawsheh
>> <rasland@mellanox.com>; Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>;
>> jerinjacobk@gmail.com; stephen@networkplumber.org;
>> ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com; maxime.coquelin@redhat.com;
>> olivier.matz@6wind.com; david.marchand@redhat.com
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure
>>
>> On 8/6/2020 5:29 PM, Slava Ovsiienko wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2020 19:16
>>>> To: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>; Slava Ovsiienko
>>>> <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>; dev@dpdk.org
>>>> Cc: Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>; Raslan Darawsheh
>>>> <rasland@mellanox.com>; Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>;
>>>> jerinjacobk@gmail.com; stephen@networkplumber.org;
>>>> ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com; maxime.coquelin@redhat.com;
>>>> olivier.matz@6wind.com; david.marchand@redhat.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure
>>>>
>>>> On 8/3/2020 3:31 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>>>>> On 8/3/20 1:58 PM, Viacheslav Ovsiienko wrote:
>>>>>> The DPDK datapath in the transmit direction is very flexible.
>>>>>> The applications can build multisegment packets and manages almost
>>>>>> all data aspects - the memory pools where segments are allocated
>>>>>> from, the segment lengths, the memory attributes like external,
>>>>>> registered, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the receiving direction, the datapath is much less flexible, the
>>>>>> applications can only specify the memory pool to configure the
>>>>>> receiving queue and nothing more. In order to extend the receiving
>>>>>> datapath capabilities it is proposed to add the new fields into
>>>>>> rte_eth_rxconf structure:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> struct rte_eth_rxconf {
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> uint16_t rx_split_num; /* number of segments to split */
>>>>>> uint16_t *rx_split_len; /* array of segment lengthes */
>>>>>> struct rte_mempool **mp; /* array of segment memory pools */
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> };
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The non-zero value of rx_split_num field configures the receiving
>>>>>> queue to split ingress packets into multiple segments to the mbufs
>>>>>> allocated from various memory pools according to the specified
>>>>>> lengths. The zero value of rx_split_num field provides the backward
>>>>>> compatibility and queue should be configured in a regular way (with
>>>>>> single/multiple mbufs of the same data buffer length allocated from
>>>>>> the single memory pool).
>>>>>
>>>>> From the above description it is not 100% clear how it will coexist
>>>>> with:
>>>>> - existing mb_pool argument of the rte_eth_rx_queue_setup()
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>> - supposed to be NULL if the array of lengths/pools is used
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER
>>>>> - DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT
>>>>> How will application know that the feature is supported? Limitations?
>>>>
>>>> +1
>>> New flag DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_BUFFER_SPLIT is supposed to be introduced.
>>> The feature requires the DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_SCATTER is set.
>>> If DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_HEADER_SPLIT is set the error is returned.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Is it always split by specified/fixed length?
>>>>> What happens if header length is actually different?
>>>>
>>>> As far as I understand intention is to filter specific packets to a
>>>> queue first and later do the split, so the header length will be fixed...
>>>
>>> Not exactly. The filtering should be handled by rte_flow engine.
>>> The intention is to provide the more flexible way to describe rx
>>> buffers. Currently it is the single pool with fixed size segments. No
>>> way to split the packet into multiple segments with specified lengths
>>> and in the specified pools. What if packet payload should be stored in
>>> the physical memory on other device (GPU/Storage)? What if caching is
>>> not desired for the payload (just forwarding application)? We could provide
>> the special NC pool.
>>> What if packet should be split into the chunks with specific gaps?
>>> For Tx direction we have this opportunity to gather packet from
>>> various pools and any desired combinations , but Rx is much less flexible.
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> The new approach would allow splitting the ingress packets into
>>>>>> multiple parts pushed to the memory with different attributes.
>>>>>> For example, the packet headers can be pushed to the embedded data
>>>>>> buffers within mbufs and the application data into the external
>>>>>> buffers attached to mbufs allocated from the different memory pools.
>>>>>> The memory attributes for the split parts may differ either - for
>>>>>> example the application data may be pushed into the external memory
>>>>>> located on the dedicated physical device, say GPU or NVMe. This
>>>>>> would improve the DPDK receiving datapath flexibility preserving
>>>>>> compatibility with existing API.
>>
>> If you don't know the packet types in advance, how can you use fixed sizes to
>> split a packet? Won't it be like having random parts of packet in each
>> mempool..
> It is per queue configuration. We have the rte_flow engine and can filter out
> the desired packets to the desired queue.
That is what I was trying to say above, intentions is first filter the packets
to a specific queue, later split them into multiple mempools, you said "not
exactly", what is the difference I am missing?
>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 5 +++++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>>>>>> b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>>>>>> index ea4cfa7..cd700ae 100644
>>>>>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>>>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>>>>>> @@ -99,6 +99,11 @@ Deprecation Notices
>>>>>> In 19.11 PMDs will still update the field even when the offload is not
>>>>>> enabled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +* ethdev: add new fields to ``rte_eth_rxconf`` to configure the
>>>>>> +receiving
>>>>>> + queues to split ingress packets into multiple segments according
>>>>>> +to the
>>>>>> + specified lengths into the buffers allocated from the specified
>>>>>> + memory pools. The backward compatibility to existing API is
>> preserved.
>>>>>> +
>>>>>> * ethdev: ``rx_descriptor_done`` dev_ops and
>>>> ``rte_eth_rx_descriptor_done``
>>>>>> will be deprecated in 20.11 and will be removed in 21.11.
>>>>>> Existing ``rte_eth_rx_descriptor_status`` and
>>>>>> ``rte_eth_tx_descriptor_status``
>>>>>
>>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-06 16:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-03 10:58 Viacheslav Ovsiienko
2020-08-03 11:56 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-08-03 13:06 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-04 13:32 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-08-05 6:35 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 15:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 16:25 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-08-06 16:41 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-08-06 17:03 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 18:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-08-07 11:23 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-03 14:31 ` [dpdk-dev] ***Spam*** " Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-06 16:15 ` [dpdk-dev] " Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 16:29 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 16:37 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 16:39 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 16:43 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2020-08-06 16:48 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-05 8:49 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Viacheslav Ovsiienko
2020-08-05 11:14 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-06 12:39 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-08-06 21:42 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-08-06 16:31 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-08-06 17:00 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 16:55 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] doc: fix the release notes for Mellanox PMD Viacheslav Ovsiienko
2020-08-06 17:12 ` Asaf Penso
2020-08-06 22:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-08-03 15:18 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-03 15:31 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-03 16:51 ` Slava Ovsiienko
2020-08-30 12:58 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-30 18:26 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-08-31 6:35 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-08-31 16:59 ` 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=a5f7815f-4e28-56e3-3866-c64c8ea849ff@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \
--cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=matan@mellanox.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=rasland@mellanox.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=viacheslavo@mellanox.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).