DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru>
To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "linuxarm@huawei.com" <linuxarm@huawei.com>,
	"chas3@att.com" <chas3@att.com>,
	"humin29@huawei.com" <humin29@huawei.com>,
	"Yigit, Ferruh" <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] net/bonding: support configuring Tx offloading for bonding
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2021 17:13:40 +0300
Message-ID: <4042d357-85e7-6e48-746a-02563132d4d2@oktetlabs.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR11MB44913B6A9B34A00CA6C3390C9A319@DM6PR11MB4491.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

On 6/14/21 2:05 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> 
> 
>> Hi, Andrew and Ananyev
>>
>> On 2021/6/9 17:37, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>>> On 6/9/21 12:11 PM, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2021/6/8 17:49, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>>>>>> "for bonding" is redundant in the summary since it is already
>>>>>> "net/bonding"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/23/21 12:46 PM, Chengchang Tang wrote:
>>>>>>> Currently, the TX offloading of the bonding device will not take effect by
>>>>>>
>>>>>> TX -> Tx
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> using dev_configure. Because the related configuration will not be
>>>>>>> delivered to the slave devices in this way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think it is a major problem that Tx offloads are actually
>>>>>> ignored. It should be a patches with "Fixes:" which addresses
>>>>>> it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Tx offloading capability of the bonding device is the intersection of
>>>>>>> the capability of all slave devices. Based on this, the following functions
>>>>>>> are added to the bonding driver:
>>>>>>> 1. If a Tx offloading is within the capability of the bonding device (i.e.
>>>>>>> all the slave devices support this Tx offloading), the enabling status of
>>>>>>> the offloading of all slave devices depends on the configuration of the
>>>>>>> bonding device.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2. For the Tx offloading that is not within the Tx offloading capability
>>>>>>> of the bonding device, the enabling status of the offloading on the slave
>>>>>>> devices is irrelevant to the bonding device configuration. And it depends
>>>>>>> on the original configuration of the slave devices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chengchang Tang <tangchengchang@huawei.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>   drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>>>>>>>   1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
>>>>>>> index 84af348..9922657 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/rte_eth_bond_pmd.c
>>>>>>> @@ -1712,6 +1712,8 @@ slave_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *bonded_eth_dev,
>>>>>>>   	struct rte_flow_error flow_error;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   	struct bond_dev_private *internals = bonded_eth_dev->data->dev_private;
>>>>>>> +	uint64_t tx_offload_cap = internals->tx_offload_capa;
>>>>>>> +	uint64_t tx_offload;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   	/* Stop slave */
>>>>>>>   	errval = rte_eth_dev_stop(slave_eth_dev->data->port_id);
>>>>>>> @@ -1759,6 +1761,17 @@ slave_configure(struct rte_eth_dev *bonded_eth_dev,
>>>>>>>   		slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.rxmode.offloads &=
>>>>>>>   				~DEV_RX_OFFLOAD_JUMBO_FRAME;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +	while (tx_offload_cap != 0) {
>>>>>>> +		tx_offload = 1ULL << __builtin_ctzll(tx_offload_cap);
>>>>>>> +		if (bonded_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads & tx_offload)
>>>>>>> +			slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads |=
>>>>>>> +				tx_offload;
>>>>>>> +		else
>>>>>>> +			slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads &=
>>>>>>> +				~tx_offload;
>>>>>>> +		tx_offload_cap &= ~tx_offload;
>>>>>>> +	}
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Frankly speaking I don't understand why it is that complicated.
>>>>>> ethdev rejects of unsupported Tx offloads. So, can't we simply:
>>>>>> slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads =
>>>>>>      bonded_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads;
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Using such a complicated method is to increase the flexibility of the slave devices,
>>>>> allowing the Tx offloading of the slave devices to be incompletely consistent with
>>>>> the bond device. If some offloading can be turned on without bond device awareness,
>>>>> they can be retained in this case.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not sure how that can that happen...
>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> @Chengchang could you provide an example how it could happen.
>>>
>>
>> For example:
>> device 1 capability: VLAN_INSERT | MBUF_FAST_FREE
>> device 2 capability: VLAN_INSERT
>> And the capability of bonded device will be VLAN_INSERT.
>> So, we can only set VLAN_INSERT for the bonded device. So what if we want to enable
>> MBUF_FAST_FREE in device 1 to improve performance? For the application, as long as it
>> can guarantee the condition of MBUF ref_cnt = 1, then it can run normally if
>> MBUF_FAST_FREE is turned on.
>>
>> In my logic, if device 1 has been configured with MBUF_FAST_FREE, and then
>> added to the bonded device as a slave. The MBUF_FAST_FREE will be reserved.
> 
> So your intention is to allow slave device silently overrule master tx_offload settings?
> If so, I don't think it is a good idea - sounds like potentially bogus and error prone approach.

+1

> Second thing - I still don't see how the code above can help you with it.
>  From what I read in your code - you clear tx_offload bits that are not not supported by the master.

+1

>>
>>>>  From my understanding tx_offload for bond device has to be intersection of tx_offloads
>>>> of all slaves, no? Otherwise bond device might be misconfigured.
>>>> Anyway for that code snippet above, wouldn't the same be achived by:
>>>> slave_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads &= internals->tx_offload_capa & bonded_eth_dev->data->dev_conf.txmode.offloads;
>>>> ?
>>>
>>
>> I think it will not achieved my purpose in the scenario I mentioned above.
>>
>>> .
>>>
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-14 14:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-16 11:04 [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/2] add Tx prepare support for bonding device Chengchang Tang
2021-04-16 11:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 1/2] net/bonding: add Tx prepare for bonding Chengchang Tang
2021-04-16 11:04 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 2/2] app/testpmd: add cmd for bonding Tx prepare Chengchang Tang
2021-04-16 11:12 ` [dpdk-dev] [RFC 0/2] add Tx prepare support for bonding device Min Hu (Connor)
2021-04-20  1:26 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-04-20  2:44   ` Chengchang Tang
2021-04-20  8:33     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-04-20 12:44       ` Chengchang Tang
2021-04-20 13:18         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-04-20 14:06           ` Chengchang Tang
2021-04-23  9:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH " Chengchang Tang
2021-04-23  9:46   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] net/bonding: support Tx prepare for bonding Chengchang Tang
2021-06-08  9:49     ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-06-09  6:42       ` Chengchang Tang
2021-06-09  9:35         ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-06-10  7:32           ` Chengchang Tang
2021-06-14 14:16             ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-06-09 10:25         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-06-10  6:46           ` Chengchang Tang
2021-06-14 11:36             ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-04-23  9:46   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] net/bonding: support configuring Tx offloading " Chengchang Tang
2021-06-08  9:49     ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-06-09  6:57       ` Chengchang Tang
2021-06-09  9:11         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-06-09  9:37           ` Andrew Rybchenko
2021-06-10  6:29             ` Chengchang Tang
2021-06-14 11:05               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2021-06-14 14:13                 ` Andrew Rybchenko [this message]
2021-04-30  6:26   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/2] add Tx prepare support for bonding device Chengchang Tang
2021-04-30  6:47     ` Min Hu (Connor)
2021-06-03  1:44   ` Chengchang Tang

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=4042d357-85e7-6e48-746a-02563132d4d2@oktetlabs.ru \
    --to=andrew.rybchenko@oktetlabs.ru \
    --cc=chas3@att.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
    --cc=humin29@huawei.com \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
    --cc=tangchengchang@huawei.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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git