From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16BF5A04DD; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:30:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE389CBF0; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:30:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 844CACB83 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 16:30:32 +0100 (CET) IronPort-SDR: u0ur14/dh9WM3zHb4DZkwSnkwXzk2kYzo/9aUYVytNZzj+sBhs5N+qxU7eWf6BrRGr7/TYYu+i EQK1+1S+339A== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9788"; a="186039058" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,426,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="186039058" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Oct 2020 08:30:31 -0700 IronPort-SDR: t3x99aJ8JwDEXB6qSIDdPby6Z0tP02S4sMMgDRGRJWD/QugX8t18G4WTSmBt+qHHiXrLP4oTNK BN9WMi32HoOg== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.77,426,1596524400"; d="scan'208";a="525153532" Received: from irvmail001.ir.intel.com ([163.33.26.43]) by fmsmga006.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Oct 2020 08:30:27 -0700 Received: from sivswdev09.ir.intel.com (sivswdev09.ir.intel.com [10.237.217.48]) by irvmail001.ir.intel.com (8.14.3/8.13.6/MailSET/Hub) with ESMTP id 09SFURHL006420; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 15:30:27 GMT Received: from sivswdev09.ir.intel.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sivswdev09.ir.intel.com with ESMTP id 09SFURFv008174; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 15:30:27 GMT Received: (from lma25@localhost) by sivswdev09.ir.intel.com with LOCAL id 09SFUQd7008165; Wed, 28 Oct 2020 15:30:26 GMT Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 15:30:26 +0000 From: "Liang, Ma" <liang.j.ma@intel.com> To: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> Cc: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>, Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, dpdk-dev <dev@dpdk.org>, "Ruifeng Wang (Arm Technology China)" <ruifeng.wang@arm.com>, "Wang, Haiyue" <haiyue.wang@intel.com>, "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>, "Hunt, David" <david.hunt@intel.com>, Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, "McDaniel, Timothy" <timothy.mcdaniel@intel.com>, "Eads, Gage" <gage.eads@intel.com>, Marcin Wojtas <mw@semihalf.com>, Guy Tzalik <gtzalik@amazon.com>, Ajit Khaparde <ajit.khaparde@broadcom.com>, Harman Kalra <hkalra@marvell.com>, John Daley <johndale@cisco.com>, "Wei Hu (Xavier" <xavier.huwei@huawei.com>, Ziyang Xuan <xuanziyang2@huawei.com>, "matan@nvidia.com" <matan@nvidia.com>, Yong Wang <yongwang@vmware.com>, "david.marchand@redhat.com" <david.marchand@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20201028153026.GD29706@sivswdev09.ir.intel.com> References: <1603494392-7181-1-git-send-email-liang.j.ma@intel.com> <20201028133507.GC29706@sivswdev09.ir.intel.com> <CALBAE1MoE+XjkLPCEO8bipT1qaXUu42w6eR4DmnuvKchav_1kg@mail.gmail.com> <2373759.1G5EZAqFcn@thomas> <BYAPR11MB3301D9ABFD81E4BA580D4A7C9A170@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <CALBAE1MU1CFxvn+MhyDErXpuwUetaFYDPbU=m9BLfGkpLsNtRw@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <CALBAE1MU1CFxvn+MhyDErXpuwUetaFYDPbU=m9BLfGkpLsNtRw@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v10 0/9] Add PMD power mgmt X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On 28 Oct 20:44, Jerin Jacob wrote: > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 8:27 PM Ananyev, Konstantin > <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > 28/10/2020 14:49, Jerin Jacob: > > > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 7:05 PM Liang, Ma <liang.j.ma@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Thomas, > > > > > I think I addressed all of the questions in relation to V9. I don't think I can solve the issue of a generic API on my own. From the > > > Community Call last week Jerin also said that a generic was investigated but that a single solution wasn't feasible. > > > > > > > > I think, From the architecture point of view, the specific > > > > functionally of UMONITOR may not be abstracted. > > > > But from the ethdev callback point of view, Can it be abstracted in > > > > such a way that packet notification available through > > > > checking interrupt status register or ring descriptor location, etc by > > > > the driver. Use that callback as a notification mechanism rather > > > > than defining a memory-based scheme that UMONITOR expects? or similar > > > > thoughts on abstraction. > > > > I think there is probably some sort of misunderstanding. > > This API is not about providing acync notification when next packet arrives. > > This is about to putting core to sleep till some event (or timeout) happens. > > From my perspective the closest analogy: cond_timedwait(). > > So we need PMD to tell us what will be the address of the condition variable > > we should sleep on. > > > > > I agree with Jerin. > > > The ethdev API is the blocking problem. > > > First problem: it is not well explained in doxygen. > > > Second problem: it is probably not generic enough (if we understand it well) > > > > It is an address to sleep(/wakeup) on, plus expected value. > > Honestly, I can't think-up of anything even more generic then that. > > If you guys have something particular in mind - please share. > > Current PMD callback: > typedef int (*eth_get_wake_addr_t)(void *rxq, volatile void > **tail_desc_addr, + uint64_t *expected, uint64_t *mask, uint8_t > *data_sz); > > Can we make it as > typedef void (*core_sleep_t)(void *rxq) How about void (*eth_core_sleep_helper_t)(void *rxq, enum scheme, void *paramter) by this way, PMD can cast the parameter accorind to the scheme. e.g. if scheme MEM_MONITOR then cast to umwait way. however, this will introduce another problem. we need add PMD query callback to figure out if PMD support this scheme. > > if we do such abstraction and "move the polling on memory by HW/CPU" > to the driver using a helper function then > I can think of abstracting in some way in all PMDs. > > Note: core_sleep_t can take some more arguments such as enumerated > policy if something more needs to be pushed to the driver. > > Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > This API is experimental and other vendor support can be added as needed. If there are any other open issue let me know? > > > > > > Being experimental is not an excuse to throw something > > > which is not satisfying. > > > > > > > >