From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Cc: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>,
Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>,
dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>,
Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>,
Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>,
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 09:25:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200806092559.614ae91f@hermes.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bd2bcee0-8205-fcd1-0de0-1350b7c07b60@intel.com>
On Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:58:22 +0100
Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
> On 8/4/2020 2:32 PM, Jerin Jacob wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 6:36 PM Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi, Jerin,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the comment, please, see below.
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com>
> >>> Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 14:57
> >>> To: Slava Ovsiienko <viacheslavo@mellanox.com>
> >>> Cc: dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>; Matan Azrad <matan@mellanox.com>;
> >>> Raslan Darawsheh <rasland@mellanox.com>; Thomas Monjalon
> >>> <thomas@monjalon.net>; Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>; Stephen
> >>> Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Andrew Rybchenko
> >>> <arybchenko@solarflare.com>; Ajit Khaparde
> >>> <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>; Maxime Coquelin
> >>> <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>; Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>;
> >>> David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
> >>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 4:28 PM Viacheslav Ovsiienko
> >>> <viacheslavo@mellanox.com> 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 pool has the packet length it's been configured for.
> >>> So I think, rx_split_len can be removed.
> >>
> >> Yes, it is one of the supposed options - if pointer to array of segment lengths
> >> is NULL , the queue_setup() could use the lengths from the pool's properties.
> >> But we are talking about packet split, in general, it should not depend
> >> on pool properties. What if application provides the single pool
> >> and just wants to have the tunnel header in the first dedicated mbuf?
> >>
> >>>
> >>> This feature also available in Marvell HW. So it not specific to one vendor.
> >>> Maybe we could just the use case mention the use case in the depreciation
> >>> notice and the tentative change in rte_eth_rxconf and exact details can be
> >>> worked out at the time of implementation.
> >>>
> >> So, if I understand correctly, the struct changes in the commit message
> >> should be marked as just possible implementation?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > We may need to have a detailed discussion on the correct abstraction for various
> > HW is available with this feature.
> >
> > On Marvell HW, We can configure TWO pools for given eth Rx queue.
> > One pool can be configured as a small packet pool and other one as
> > large packet pool.
> > And there is a threshold value to decide the pool between small and large.
> > For example:
> > - The small pool is configured 2k
> > - The large pool is configured with 10k
> > - And if the threshold value is configured as 2k.
> > Any packet size <=2K will land in small pool and others in a large pool.
> > The use case, we are targeting is to save the memory space for jumbo frames.
>
> Out of curiosity, do you provide two different buffer address in the descriptor
> and HW automatically uses one based on the size,
> or driver uses one of the pools based on the configuration and possible largest
> packet size?
I am all for allowing more configuration of buffer pool.
But don't want that to be exposed as a hardware specific requirement in the
API for applications. The worst case would be if your API changes required:
if (strcmp(dev->driver_name, "marvell") == 0) {
// make another mempool for this driver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-06 16:26 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 [this message]
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
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=20200806092559.614ae91f@hermes.lan \
--to=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com \
--cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=jerinjacobk@gmail.com \
--cc=matan@mellanox.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
--cc=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
--cc=rasland@mellanox.com \
--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).