DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>,
	Shijith Thotton <shijith.thotton@cavium.com>,
	Santosh Shukla <santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com>,
	Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>,
	John Daley <johndale@cisco.com>,
	Wenzhuo Lu <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>,
	Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	Beilei Xing <beilei.xing@intel.com>,
	Qi Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>,
	Jingjing Wu <jingjing.wu@intel.com>,
	Adrien Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>,
	Nelio Laranjeiro <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>,
	Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>,
	Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
	Tomasz Duszynski <tdu@semihalf.com>,
	Jianbo Liu <jianbo.liu@arm.com>,
	Alejandro Lucero <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>,
	Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
	Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>,
	Harish Patil <harish.patil@cavium.com>,
	Rasesh Mody <rasesh.mody@cavium.com>,
	Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
	Shrikrishna Khare <skhare@vmware.com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
	Allain Legacy <allain.legacy@windriver.com>,
	Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
	Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>,
	Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Survey for final decision about per-port offload API
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 11:11:40 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180412054138.GA11392@jerin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2759953.P7QpFFSjiU@xps>

-----Original Message-----
> Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2018 15:47:55 +0200
> From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> To: dev@dpdk.org
> Cc: Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>, Jerin Jacob
>  <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>, Shijith Thotton
>  <shijith.thotton@cavium.com>, Santosh Shukla
>  <santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com>, Rahul Lakkireddy
>  <rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com>, John Daley <johndale@cisco.com>, Wenzhuo
>  Lu <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>, Konstantin Ananyev
>  <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, Beilei Xing <beilei.xing@intel.com>, Qi
>  Zhang <qi.z.zhang@intel.com>, Jingjing Wu <jingjing.wu@intel.com>, Adrien
>  Mazarguil <adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com>, Nelio Laranjeiro
>  <nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com>, Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>, Shahaf
>  Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>, Tomasz Duszynski <tdu@semihalf.com>, Jianbo
>  Liu <jianbo.liu@arm.com>, Alejandro Lucero
>  <alejandro.lucero@netronome.com>, Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>,
>  Shreyansh Jain <shreyansh.jain@nxp.com>, Harish Patil
>  <harish.patil@cavium.com>, Rasesh Mody <rasesh.mody@cavium.com>, Andrew
>  Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, Shrikrishna Khare
>  <skhare@vmware.com>, Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>, Allain
>  Legacy <allain.legacy@windriver.com>, Bruce Richardson
>  <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, Gaetan Rivet <gaetan.rivet@6wind.com>,
>  Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
> Subject: Survey for final decision about per-port offload API
> 
> There are some discussions about a specific part of the offload API:
> 	"To enable per-port offload, the offload should be set on both
> 	device configuration and queue setup."
> 
> It means the application must repeat the port offload flags
> in rte_eth_conf.[rt]xmode.offloads and rte_eth_[rt]xconf.offloads,
> when calling respectively rte_eth_dev_configure() and
> rte_eth_[rt]x_queue_setup for each queue.
> 
> The PMD must check if there is mismatch, i.e. a port offload not
> repeated in queue setup.
> There is a proposal to do this check at ethdev level:
> 	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-March/094023.html
> 
> It was also proposed to relax the API and allow "forgetting" port
> offloads in queue offloads:
> 	http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-March/092978.html
> 
> It would mean the offloads applied to a queue result of OR operation:
> 	rte_eth_conf.[rt]xmode.offloads | rte_eth_[rt]xconf.offloads
> 
> 1/ Do you agree with above API change?

Yes.

> 
> 
> If we agree with this change, we need to update the documentation
> and remove the checks in PMDs.
> Note: no matter what is decided here, 18.05-rc1 should have all PMDs
> switched to the API which was defined in 17.11.
> Given that API is new and not yet adopted by the applications,
> the sonner it is fixed, the better.
> 
> 2/ Should we do this change in 18.05-rc2?

Yes.

> 
> 
> At the same time, we want to make clear that an offload enabled at
> port level, cannot be disabled at queue level.
> 
> 3/ Do you agree with above statement (to be added in the doc)?

Yes.

> 
> 
> There is the same kind of confusion in the offload capabilities:
> 	rte_eth_dev_info.[rt]x_offload_capa
> 	rte_eth_dev_info.[rt]x_queue_offload_capa
> The queue capabilities must be a subset of port capabilities,
> i.e. every queue capabilities must be reported as port capabilities.
> But the port capabilities should be reported at queue level
> only if it can be applied to a specific queue.
> 
> 4/ Do you agree with above statement (to be added in the doc)?

Yes

> 
> 
> Please give your opinion on questions 1, 2, 3 and 4.
> Answering by yes/no may be sufficient in most cases :)
> Thank you
> 
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-04-12  5:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-03-30 13:47 Thomas Monjalon
2018-03-30 15:13 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2018-03-30 15:46   ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-01  1:51 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2018-04-02 15:44   ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-01  4:44 ` Shahaf Shuler
2018-04-02 15:53   ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-03  5:19     ` Shahaf Shuler
2018-04-02  1:27 ` Lu, Wenzhuo
2018-04-02  3:18 ` Xing, Beilei
2018-04-02 17:23 ` Wu, Jingjing
2018-04-02 17:39 ` Patil, Harish
2018-04-02 20:10   ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-02 20:45     ` Patil, Harish
2018-04-03  0:53 ` Zhang, Qi Z
2018-04-03 19:59 ` John Daley (johndale)
2018-04-04  0:25 ` Yongseok Koh
2018-04-11 14:42 ` Olivier Matz
2018-04-11 15:17 ` Alejandro Lucero
2018-04-12  5:41 ` Jerin Jacob [this message]
2018-04-12  7:03 ` Maxime Coquelin
2018-04-12  9:08 ` Shreyansh Jain
2018-04-24 10:39 ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-24 11:08   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-04-24 12:27     ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-24 15:20       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2018-04-24 16:18         ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-24 12:56   ` Shahaf Shuler
2018-04-24 22:00   ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-25 13:32     ` Ferruh Yigit
2018-04-25 15:21       ` Thomas Monjalon
2018-04-25 16:45       ` 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=20180412054138.GA11392@jerin \
    --to=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=adrien.mazarguil@6wind.com \
    --cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \
    --cc=alejandro.lucero@netronome.com \
    --cc=allain.legacy@windriver.com \
    --cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
    --cc=beilei.xing@intel.com \
    --cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=gaetan.rivet@6wind.com \
    --cc=harish.patil@cavium.com \
    --cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
    --cc=jianbo.liu@arm.com \
    --cc=jingjing.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=johndale@cisco.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
    --cc=nelio.laranjeiro@6wind.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=qi.z.zhang@intel.com \
    --cc=rahul.lakkireddy@chelsio.com \
    --cc=rasesh.mody@cavium.com \
    --cc=santosh.shukla@caviumnetworks.com \
    --cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
    --cc=shijith.thotton@cavium.com \
    --cc=shreyansh.jain@nxp.com \
    --cc=skhare@vmware.com \
    --cc=tdu@semihalf.com \
    --cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
    --cc=wenzhuo.lu@intel.com \
    --cc=yskoh@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).