Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/3] ethdev: add max burst size to device info

["Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@linux.intel.com>]

On 4/5/2019 3:55 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 5/22/2018 11:17 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
>> 12/12/2017 11:05, Nikhil Agarwal:
>>> Currently, if the  rte_eth_rx_burst() function returns a value less than
>>> *nb_pkts*, the application will assume that no more packets are present.
>>>
>>> Some of the hw queue based hardware can only support smaller burst for RX
>>> and TX and thus break the expectation of the rx_burst API.
>>>
>>> This patch adds support to provide the maximum burst size that can be
>>> supported by a given PMD. The dev_info is being memset to '0' in
>>> rte_ethdev library. The value of '0' indicates that any value for burst
>>> size can be supported i.e. no change for existing PMDs.
>>>
>>> The application can now use the lowest available max_burst_size value
>>> for rte_eth_rx_burst.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Nikhil Agarwal <nikhil.agarwal@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>> @@ -1047,6 +1047,7 @@ struct rte_eth_dev_info {
>>>  	/** Configured number of rx/tx queues */
>>>  	uint16_t nb_rx_queues; /**< Number of RX queues. */
>>>  	uint16_t nb_tx_queues; /**< Number of TX queues. */
>>> +	uint16_t max_burst_size; /**< MAX burst size, 0 for no limit. */
>>>  };
>>
>> What is the status of this proposal?
>>
>> Recently, the preferred tuning have been added by
>> 	"ethdev: support PMD-tuned Tx/Rx parameters"
>> 	http://dpdk.org/commit/3be82f5cc5
> 
> Hi Nikhil, Hemant,
> 
> PMD returning preferred 'burst_size' support already added, I guess this
> patchset is no more valid. I am updating this as rejected.
> 
> If something is missing or there are still some relevant pieces in this patch,
> please send as a new version on top of latest head.

As reference, mentioned patches:
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/32112/
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/32113/
https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/32114/