From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.droids-corp.org (zoll.droids-corp.org [94.23.50.67]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0099CF1F for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 09:37:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from lfbn-lil-1-182-75.w90-45.abo.wanadoo.fr ([90.45.31.75] helo=droids-corp.org) by mail.droids-corp.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dwO2x-0003L7-NV; Mon, 25 Sep 2017 09:43:21 +0200 Received: by droids-corp.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 25 Sep 2017 09:37:30 +0200 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 09:37:30 +0200 From: Olivier MATZ To: Santosh Shukla Cc: dev@dpdk.org, thomas@monjalon.net, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com, hemant.agrawal@nxp.com Message-ID: <20170925073728.auchwn7mxx63b32j@platinum> References: <20170815080717.9413-1-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> <20170911151837.25092-1-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> <20170911151837.25092-3-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170911151837.25092-3-santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] ethdev: get the supported pools for a port X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2017 07:37:38 -0000 Hi, On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 08:48:37PM +0530, Santosh Shukla wrote: > Now that dpdk supports more than one mempool drivers and > each mempool driver works best for specific PMD, example: > - sw ring based mempool for Intel PMD drivers. > - dpaa2 HW mempool manager for dpaa2 PMD driver. > - fpa HW mempool manager for Octeontx PMD driver. > > Application would like to know the best mempool handle > for any port. > > Introducing rte_eth_dev_pools_ops_supported() API, > which allows PMD driver to advertise > his supported pools capability to the application. > > Supported pools are categorized in below priority:- > - Best mempool handle for this port (Highest priority '0') > - Port supports this mempool handle (Priority '1') > > Signed-off-by: Santosh Shukla > > [...] > > +int > +rte_eth_dev_pools_ops_supported(uint8_t port_id, const char *pool) pools -> pool? > +{ > + struct rte_eth_dev *dev; > + const char *tmp; > + > + RTE_ETH_VALID_PORTID_OR_ERR_RET(port_id, -ENODEV); > + > + if (pool == NULL) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + dev = &rte_eth_devices[port_id]; > + > + if (*dev->dev_ops->pools_ops_supported == NULL) { > + tmp = rte_eal_mbuf_default_mempool_ops(); > + if (!strcmp(tmp, pool)) > + return 0; > + else > + return -ENOTSUP; I don't understand why we are comparing with rte_eal_mbuf_default_mempool_ops(). It means that the result of the function would be influenced by the parameter given by the user. I think that a PMD that does not implement ->pools_ops_supported should always return 1 (mempool is supported). > + } > + > + return (*dev->dev_ops->pools_ops_supported)(dev, pool); > +} > diff --git a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h > index 0adf3274a..d90029b1e 100644 > --- a/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h > +++ b/lib/librte_ether/rte_ethdev.h > @@ -1425,6 +1425,10 @@ typedef int (*eth_get_dcb_info)(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > struct rte_eth_dcb_info *dcb_info); > /**< @internal Get dcb information on an Ethernet device */ > > +typedef int (*eth_pools_ops_supported_t)(struct rte_eth_dev *dev, > + const char *pool); > +/**< @internal Get the supported pools for a port */ > + The comment should be something like: Test if a port supports specific mempool ops. > /** > * @internal A structure containing the functions exported by an Ethernet driver. > */ > @@ -1544,6 +1548,8 @@ struct eth_dev_ops { > > eth_tm_ops_get_t tm_ops_get; > /**< Get Traffic Management (TM) operations. */ > + eth_pools_ops_supported_t pools_ops_supported; > + /**< Get the supported pools for a port */ Same > }; > > /** > @@ -4436,6 +4442,24 @@ int rte_eth_dev_adjust_nb_rx_tx_desc(uint8_t port_id, > uint16_t *nb_rx_desc, > uint16_t *nb_tx_desc); > > + > +/** > + * Get the supported pools for a port Same > + * > + * @param port_id > + * Port identifier of the Ethernet device. > + * @param [in] pool > + * The supported pool handle for this port. The name of the pool operations to test > + * Maximum length of pool handle name is RTE_MEMPOOL_OPS_NAMESIZE. I don't think we should keep this Thanks, Olivier