From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A1CB42486; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 15:00:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60D8A42D47; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 15:00:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0FC042D3E for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 15:00:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D8645C00F2; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:00:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:00:02 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1674655202; x= 1674741602; bh=EA/3DLPHWIZnkkjIG31csCNcPoAJBZn3u0Fn8lX0rL8=; b=a Fz7rj5duT3TvAGGvEYjQwF9NguYFaY1UWuDsbBmPbFV2GgJzHcjSVzT0jKo/a0wM B3BwgYaqwAMUKGF+ABgu9ya5kfH3y89fdmnV0W07ft5o5IzpAZolC/ikX4rptCu8 uXhyHVKtgz4F5gLmSEulJ9jLdbes2cp58+7qE5LtRKA8eW0drdBaI1f8UFnWO0ie oSEy3UwqT9gRNneDpQROFK/Ufr8DHoGscoWZyCklsg7iKrUpsDyAJo/h/ejEXIKD E4cttURGtNHS/itUxn6KzvE1zmWprLMEhGjqDW89wL3lIxJagcEmMGb8mhvPFGRS a3Yd2KVynK+EhfxVI51EQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t=1674655202; x= 1674741602; bh=EA/3DLPHWIZnkkjIG31csCNcPoAJBZn3u0Fn8lX0rL8=; b=a GeRkCMycZ1D847CF4ZM+rsI8E3yWfO6cq6FxiK3VLTgbGoB7FB1QhypEhU/B8JcF RzE68pg16ig15nkTXCBc3koV26p6BMm60UsrnazwUbnyOyPqeZvUg1bw7OG/yuAB poeeKfUhdrKf07mX87GcJtVKza6nRELAIUJD6XOhE+uIZPB27AdtpAFY6UbDxY7x FwzyP9+9aFTwdNR40lpU9XVqKtKUTKJAohzvAKDO8dR9nMX3B6v5q3WjgjI/E/w0 rtdvZg1lLtQxtNyBBbDR4rmSpvM4Ggh31mf3n2e8ivSlbl4HmXaEGLMlcDc7axXa 749vfUBZtvvwPzyAkTovA== X-ME-Sender: <xms:4jXRY9ByAEVTkt8tMrIHix1ISw41xS2tviZOKMvGB-l_on0vTl3PWg> <xme:4jXRY7jeDUgfkDCNSEDydFcc_k8LN-IQJhFgJ5XVD5EM1nsUgt4kQC_1uAvP9ujF3 CcE-Cr1R9IeNgEz0g> X-ME-Received: <xmr:4jXRY4l8Af0K2YJHr9H6bg3cbC46Q8v4W8vg6QddUljaJ6EBKeNk0Dds36vvxD5tFK_CGSiBRXTa6tksoCzpxWzbTg> X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedruddvvddgheekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:4jXRY3yItPCGPdC9tOOUyPL93m8Hms7IscoEjCa9b1_5R50mW60vQA> <xmx:4jXRYyRJEUYMuZ5uVFW2ep9CUV-5m8NjMh_juVXmOQdW6LdRt_fKgA> <xmx:4jXRY6YYKYNpqxstTZN7vvXPMxDMWBD8kNV6_JVP8E6G9WWpIH-JCw> <xmx:4jXRYz_ALPzZIL1X-snsXJZ21XfL9xjUEtza2cgP-zTNG9k-cvGS0Q> Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 25 Jan 2023 09:00:00 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> To: Aman Singh <aman.deep.singh@intel.com>, Yuying Zhang <yuying.zhang@intel.com>, Ivan Malov <ivan.malov@oktetlabs.ru>, Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>, dev@dpdk.org, Hanumanth Reddy Pothula <hpothula@marvell.com>, Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com> Cc: "viacheslavo@nvidia.com" <viacheslavo@nvidia.com>, Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>, Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram <ndabilpuram@marvell.com>, david.marchand@redhat.com Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] app/testpmd: add command to process Rx metadata negotiation Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 14:59:59 +0100 Message-ID: <2252130.NnIJQXNAa5@thomas> In-Reply-To: <aa260e84-f433-590e-4423-ce7de52aab32@amd.com> References: <20221220200250.2413443-1-hpothula@marvell.com> <5290135.upeRZZJTqa@thomas> <aa260e84-f433-590e-4423-ce7de52aab32@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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 25/01/2023 14:55, Ferruh Yigit: > On 1/25/2023 12:55 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 25/01/2023 10:30, Hanumanth Reddy Pothula: > >> ++ Ivan Malov and Andrew Rybchenko > >> > >> From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@amd.com> > >>> On 12/21/2022 2:07 AM, Hanumanth Pothula wrote: > >>>> Presently, Rx metadata is sent to PMD by default, leading to a > >>>> performance drop as processing for the same in Rx path takes extra > >>>> cycles. > >>>> > >>>> Hence, add new testpmd command, > >>>> 'enable port <port_id> nic_to_pmd_rx_metadata' > >>>> > >>>> This command helps in sending Rx metadata to PMD and thereby Rx > >>>> metadata flow command requests are processed. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Hanumanth Pothula <hpothula@marvell.com> > >>> > >>> Hi Hanumanth, > >>> > >>> I agree with Thomas for the patch. > >>> > >>> 'eth_rx_metadata_negotiate_mp()' requests all Rx metadata offloads to be > >>> enabled, but at this stage if there is no flow rule for Rx metadata why it is > >>> consuming extra cycles? > >>> > >>> Can you update driver code to process Rx metadata when it is enabled by > >>> application (via 'rte_eth_rx_metadata_negotiate()') AND there is at least > >>> one flow rule for it? > >> > >> #1 What is the purpose of rte_eth_rx_metadata_negotiate() API if it is always called by testpmd. > >> We thought it was added so that when that metadata is not needed, application need not call this > >> thereby saving cycles/bandwidth. > > > > testpmd is for testing all features. That's why all is negotiated. > > Cycles should be saved if you don't enable it until a flow rule requires it. > > > > Hi Thomas, > > Not just for saving cycles, but from testing perspective too, do you > think does it work if a way to disable these Rx metadata added by > keeping default behavior as it is? > > And new command can be in a consistent command syntax like: > "port config <port_id> ..." Yes I agree it would be good to have a way to test different values. And it would allow to completely disable metadata I suppose. Note: I don't understand why we don't have RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_TAG and RTE_FLOW_ACTION_TYPE_SET_META negotiated in this function. Probably something to add. > >> #2 We use this API similar to Rx/Tx offload flags so that we can set things up before device is > >> configured. We thought that is the purpose of having this negotiate API and avoid depleting offload flags. > > > > It is just a configuration negotiation specific to metadata. > > > >> #3 Generally any new offloads added to DPDK would be in disabled state in testpmd and we would have > >> an option to enable it. In this case, testpmd is by default calling this negotiation. > > > > Negotiating is not enabling. > > > >> We can update the driver if the purpose of this API is clear. > > > > Please do. > > Is following understanding correct? > > API Flow Rule Result > ----- ------------ -------- > Enable No Rule Feature Disabled > Enable Rule exist Feature Enabled > Disable X Feature Disabled In the API column, you should say "negotiated" instead of "Enable".