DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
To: Vlad Zolotarov <vladz@cloudius-systems.com>,
	 "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>,
	"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] ixgbe: Add LRO support
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 10:07:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5502A8E8.3010004@6wind.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5500734A.7060800@cloudius-systems.com>

Hi Vlad,

On 03/11/2015 05:54 PM, Vlad Zolotarov wrote:
>>>> About the existing RX/TX functions and PPC support:
>>>> Note that all of them were created before PPC support for DPDK was
>>>> introduced.
>>>> At that moment only IA was supported.
>>>> That's why in some places where you would expect to see 'mb()' there
>>>> are 'volatile' and/or ' rte_compiler_barrier' instead.
>>>> Why all that places wasn't updated when PPC support was added -
>>>> that's another question.
>>>>   From my understanding - with current implementation some of DPDK
>>>> PMDs RX/TX functions and  rte_ring wouldn't work correctly
>>> on PPC.
>>>> So, I suppose we need to decide for ourselves - do we really want to
>>>> support PPC and other architectures with non-IA memory
>>> model or not?
>>>> If not, then I think we don't need any mb()s inside recv_pkts_lro()
>>>> - just rte_compiler_barrier seems enough, and no point to
>>> complain about
>>>> it in comments.
>>>> If yes - then why to introduce a new function with a known potential
>>>> bug?
>>> In order to introduce a new function with the proper implementation or
>>> to fix any other places with the similar weakness I would need a proper
>>> tools like a proper platform-dependent barrier-macros similar to
>>> smp_Xmb() Linux macros that reduce to a compiler barrier where
>>> appropriate or to a proper memory fence where needed.
>> I understand that.
>> Let's add new macro for that: rte_smp_Xmb() or something,
>> so it would be just rte_compiler_barrier() for x86 and a proper mb()
>> for PPC.
> There was an idea to use the C11 built-in memory barriers. I suggest we
> open a separate discussion about that and add these and the appropriate
> fixes in a separate series. There are quite a few places to fix anyway,
> which are currently broken on PPC so this patch doesn't make things any
> worse. However adding a new memory barrier doesn't belong to an LRO
> functionality and thus to this series.

This is an interesting discussion. Just for reference, I submitted a
patch on this topic but it was probably too early as only Intel
architecture was supported at that time.

See http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2014-May/002597.html


  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-13  9:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-09 19:07 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 0/3]: Add LRO support to ixgbe PMD Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-09 19:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 1/3] ixgbe: Cleanups Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-09 20:15   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-09 19:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 2/3] ixgbe: Code refactoring Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-09 19:07 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v6 3/3] ixgbe: Add LRO support Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-10  0:30   ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-10 13:22     ` Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-10 20:09       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-10 21:36         ` Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-11 16:32           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-11 16:54             ` Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-13  9:07               ` Olivier MATZ [this message]
2015-03-13 11:28                 ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-13 12:12                   ` Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-10 17:51     ` Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-16 18:26   ` Vlad Zolotarov
2015-03-18  0:31     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2015-03-18 10:29       ` Vlad Zolotarov

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=5502A8E8.3010004@6wind.com \
    --to=olivier.matz@6wind.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=vladz@cloudius-systems.com \


* 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).