From: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
"Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
"Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>,
"Kovacevic, Marko" <marko.kovacevic@intel.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: plan splitting the ethdev ops struct
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2020 14:19:57 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <322b64a5-2b4b-a3a9-5084-6eb6c92e34ef@solarflare.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <SN6PR11MB25588DA209D88D4FD2BF33F99AED0@SN6PR11MB2558.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Hi Konstantin,
On 2/25/20 2:07 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> Hi Andew,
>
>> On 2/21/20 1:40 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>> On 2/18/2020 6:01 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 15:38:05 +0000
>>>> Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> For the ABI compatibility it is better to hide internal data structures
>>>>> from the application as much as possible. But because of some inline
>>>>> functions 'struct eth_dev_ops' can't be hidden completely.
>>>>>
>>>>> Plan is to split the 'struct eth_dev_ops' into two as ones used by
>>>>> inline functions and ones not used, and hide the second part that not
>>>>> used by inline functions completely to the application.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Cc: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
>>>>> Cc: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
>>>>> Cc: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 6 ++++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>>>>> index dfcca87ab..2aa431028 100644
>>>>> --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>>>>> +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst
>>>>> @@ -72,6 +72,12 @@ Deprecation Notices
>>>>> In 19.11 PMDs will still update the field even when the offload is not
>>>>> enabled.
>>>>>
>>>>> +* ethdev: Split the ``struct eth_dev_ops`` struct to hide it as much as possible.
>>>>> + Currently the ``struct eth_dev_ops`` struct is accessible by the application
>>>>> + because some inline functions, like ``rte_eth_tx_descriptor_status()``,
>>>>> + access the struct directly. The struct will be separate in two, the ops used
>>>>> + by inline functions still will be accessible to user but rest will be hidden.
>>>>> +
>>>>> * cryptodev: support for using IV with all sizes is added, J0 still can
>>>>> be used but only when IV length in following structs ``rte_crypto_auth_xform``,
>>>>> ``rte_crypto_aead_xform`` is set to zero. When IV length is greater or equal
>>>> Good luck, truely hiding internals is hard. The mbuf structure is already split but not really
>>>> hidden at all (just look at dwarf output). It doesn't make sense to do it unless
>>>> you can really hide it.
>>> I believe this can be done, only following [1] dev_ops are used by inline
>>> functions, rest can be moved into separate struct and moved into ethdev driver
>>> looking header.
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> rx_queue_count
>>> rx_descriptor_done
>>> rx_descriptor_status
>>> tx_descriptor_status
>> I think having 3 places (if I understand the intention
>> correctly) with ethdev callbacks is too much. So, I think
>> that these ops should be simply moved to nearby Tx/Rx
>> burst and Tx prepare callbacks (e.g. move into inline_ops
>> structure which is located at the beginning of rte_eth_dev
>> in order to preserve 3 existing callback location).
> If you are going to change ABI anyway, would it be worth to consider
> moving rx/tx burst/prepare functions to be per queue,
> instead of per device?
I'm thinking about it from time to time. In general I like the idea.
The only question I have if there is a demand for queues with
different offloads which could result in different Rx/Tx callbacks.
Also I'm not sure that it is doable without performance degradation
at all, but hopefully it will be tiny.
>> Also I'd consider to deprecate and remove rx_queue_count
>> and rx_descriptor_done.
>>
>>>> I would attack the rte_device stuff first. Make rte_device opaque to the application
>>>> that would help for future versions. Then work backwards to rte_tehtdev.
>>>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-25 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-17 15:38 Ferruh Yigit
2020-02-18 5:07 ` Jerin Jacob
2020-02-25 12:42 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-26 13:01 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-02-18 6:01 ` Stephen Hemminger
2020-02-21 10:40 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-02-25 10:35 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-02-25 11:07 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-02-25 11:19 ` Andrew Rybchenko [this message]
2020-02-25 12:28 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-02-25 12:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Ferruh Yigit
2020-02-25 15:51 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-02-25 16:13 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-02-25 16:41 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-02-25 18:13 ` David Marchand
2020-02-25 18:18 ` Ferruh Yigit
2020-03-04 9:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Ferruh Yigit
2020-05-24 23:18 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-25 9:11 ` Andrew Rybchenko
2020-05-26 13:55 ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-05-25 10:24 ` David Marchand
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=322b64a5-2b4b-a3a9-5084-6eb6c92e34ef@solarflare.com \
--to=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
--cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=john.mcnamara@intel.com \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
--cc=marko.kovacevic@intel.com \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/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).