From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B035841B9E; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:05:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43C52406A2; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:05:03 +0100 (CET) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16FF24021F for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 12:05:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4D515C015E; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 06:05:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 01 Feb 2023 06:05:01 -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=1675249501; x= 1675335901; bh=jr2qnLKZKf/190IwcH7WVtXBrhEIyjEPBL2xBouoIk4=; b=j 2JeMrwP7iyACwr9A8v/0rrrmc5lbtzQSbgBrv7V6KprxydBIqBg3JP8fo1lfB4GX lDFztgNsbdj65gtSKbmZzXEFHDJVihtQcJ5OPVvVDJh1t/BC8qqYfegrFtGtp5fP AaWDkUvhPKhcygs0AnhrmVj87QJmbMifTowu7rxT+ScmR0l8jH8FNVVV2RhBdML3 tYbf1/EWXkxLXLFBQQXiczlkAZecHGIYMCXrCwgla1cazjyw3mZO67VQsS+W0uUt BOd9E70lv3muaOrD3DTpLU2oIj/OcmHuo/4wu6GrVqVFxq40FgA03SHg3CWRZ/N9 lRvAPMRd541nUG79iT97A== 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=1675249501; x= 1675335901; bh=jr2qnLKZKf/190IwcH7WVtXBrhEIyjEPBL2xBouoIk4=; b=r fjJLPsxLXjHfqmJF/v7O0bjJ7yZStMJ4qLX9QuaXll8Ete80iD//5I1Q8BidBhB8 x+0+w0Fu9UoNIrioY1JmBSNrXBeV6ITbw9BlOnEraEqZM9mf+ead8g7rRt900jvO VbEVAWNsonOJS1wpV7NroBVf2dl/YI1l/1t+2JHelC2ZavcVmZpmwAMbD2Tqb0g5 ztgTMtykucnPl/vuCpSSU+A5DfUvgqzfflm4951OHmJ7uK4BKODvZAm0NItH5Tsr t3hEz5DurggMXS92OItV3Ykgi2hyBafYpNDa0B4xSRL7x47Z9nS8VlpIBlxhh73W FeR4TgcQc7ApFwq9ngyeA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvhedrudefiedgvdegucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtjeeiieefhedtfffgvdelteeufeefheeujefgueetfedttdei kefgkeduhedtgfenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfh hrohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 1 Feb 2023 06:04:59 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob , Andrew Rybchenko , Ferruh Yigit Cc: Ori Kam , Ivan Malov , Nithin Kumar Dabilpuram , Aman Singh , Yuying Zhang , "dev@dpdk.org" , Hanumanth Reddy Pothula , Slava Ovsiienko , Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , "david.marchand@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] app/testpmd: add command to process Rx metadata negotiation Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:04:58 +0100 Message-ID: <2490780.4XsnlVU6TS@thomas> In-Reply-To: <98a80c20-a5e4-deea-f7dc-c6aa5d52800b@oktetlabs.ru> References: <20221220200250.2413443-1-hpothula@marvell.com> <98a80c20-a5e4-deea-f7dc-c6aa5d52800b@oktetlabs.ru> 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org 01/02/2023 11:58, Andrew Rybchenko: > On 2/1/23 13:48, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 2:59 PM Andrew Rybchenko > > wrote: > >> Frankly speaking I don't understand why default value is so > >> important if we have a way to change it. Reasons should be > >> really strong to change existing defaults. > > > > The only reason is, typically testpmd will be used performance > > benchmarking as an industry standard. It is difficult to tell/educate > > the QA or customers > > that, "BTW if you need to get better performance add more flag to > > testpmd command line". I disagree. When you do performance benchmark, you tune settings accordingly. > > To make that worst, only some PMD needs to give the additional > > parameter to get better number. > > And also, testpmd usage will be treated as application modeling. > > > > Since this feature only used on sfc and cnxk driver, What is the > > situation with sfc driver? > > Keeping it as negotiated and not use the feature, will impact the per > > core performance of sfc or > > is it just PCI bandwidth thing which really dont show any difference in testpmd? > > Yes, sfc could run faster if no Rx metadata are negotiated. So, > it is better to negotiate nothing by default. But it is always > painful to change defaults. You need to explain that now you > need to negotiate Rx metadata to use mark, flag and tunnel offloads. > Yes, it will be required on sfc and cnxk only. > As an sfc maintainer I don't mind to change testpmd defaults. If we change testpmd defaults to "do nothing", then we should disable MBUF_FAST_FREE as well.