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 4700E4380B; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:29:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11954402BC; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:29:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from agw.arknetworks.am (agw.arknetworks.am [79.141.165.80]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8FA4013F for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 19:29:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from debian (unknown [78.109.67.164]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by agw.arknetworks.am (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 12C0DE124D; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 22:29:32 +0400 (+04) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 agw.arknetworks.am 12C0DE124D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arknetworks.am; s=default; t=1704306573; bh=w6ZXXhiv+IgzzLf5qsevKX5M9Wxa67lTNJ5Hvab5U8w=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=XSAJYXctNfCRK1rp3/S6klhxHll8YeDGVpQGM9vYG8a2dt+DHROnFI+Q+bfCg+Cty fkN6WCu9x/yPklpqPwOK5bdmxMc6pI8PX5vKf1JtLQFl217vejNBnGwdV4sU+KprNl i7cLh+5NnqE4c/2LzdB5198xOtzXyMZZLm6nW+uoVp/+nj+PgfO5zlvOiT052mktkN 1qtSBVRUk2vkX+OViWhKOBogSBeP2H2WgDJcuZoxqBjthMQ8toAZo58XlewGuandHz tNxQMGiy1kvQqUwiW9jYoOd1/y5NA8uar0SEe60p2FR548a+RZC7LgNNSyH8NMof0r QmTXVrr3u5QQA== Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2024 22:29:10 +0400 (+04) From: Ivan Malov To: Dariusz Sosnowski cc: Stephen Hemminger , "NBU-Contact-Thomas Monjalon (EXTERNAL)" , Ferruh Yigit , Andrew Rybchenko , Ori Kam , "dev@dpdk.org" Subject: RE: [RFC] ethdev: fast path async flow API In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <49bdbec1-8b75-dd59-f03d-2bf4779dda6d@arknetworks.am> References: <20231227105709.1951231-1-dsosnowski@nvidia.com> <20231227094117.678ce828@hermes.local> <014e697b-a0f1-32d5-dc1e-11cd24c7f38e@arknetworks.am> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed 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 Hi Dariusz, I appreciate your response. All to the point. I have to confess my question was inspired by the 23.11 merge commit in OVS mailing list. I first thought that an obvious consumer for the async flow API could have been OVS but saw no usage of it in the current code. It was my impression that there had been some patches in OVS already, waiting either for approval/testing or for this particular optimisation to be accepted first. So far I've been mistaken -- there are no such patches, hence my question. Do we have real-world examples of the async flow usage? Should it be tested somehow... (I apologise in case I'm asking for too many clarifications). Thank you. On Wed, 3 Jan 2024, Dariusz Sosnowski wrote: > Hi Ivan, > >> Hi Dariusz, >> >> I appreciate the proposal. You say that a reference PMD implementation will >> be made available for 24.03 release. What about the applications? >> Is this supposed to go to upstream code of some applications? > No source code changes are required in applications which already use async flow APIs. > API signatures are not changed in this proposal. > > Only the PMD changes are required. > To be specific - callbacks for async flow APIs should not be put in rte_flow_ops, > but registered by calling rte_flow_fp_ops_register(). > > Best regards, > Dariusz Sosnowski >