Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 6/8] net/ice: support Rx AVX2 vector

["Lu, Wenzhuo" <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>]

Hi Maxime,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Maxime Coquelin [mailto:maxime.coquelin@redhat.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 25, 2019 4:26 PM
> To: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 6/8] net/ice: support Rx AVX2 vector
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 3/25/19 3:22 AM, Lu, Wenzhuo wrote:
> > Hi Maxime,
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Maxime Coquelin [mailto:maxime.coquelin@redhat.com]
> >> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 6:12 PM
> >> To: Lu, Wenzhuo <wenzhuo.lu@intel.com>; dev@dpdk.org
> >> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 6/8] net/ice: support Rx AVX2
> >> vector
> >
> >
> >>> +#ifndef RTE_LIBRTE_ICE_16BYTE_RX_DESC
> >>
> >> I see same is done for other Intel NICs, but I wonder what would be
> >> the performance cost of making it dynamic, if any cost?
> > Currently we don't have a good idea to make it dynamic. If we use pointer
> to point to different functions for 16 byte and 32 byte, there's too much
> duplicate code to make it hard to maintain. If we use the same function, and
> check the configure in it. It impacts the performance.
> 
> Have you done some measurements, what would be the performance
> impact?
I mean if we check the configuration is 16 byte or 32 byte, this check will consume extra CPU cycles.
That why I think the better way is to have different paths for 16 byte and 32 byte. We should choose the appropriate path at the beginning.

> 
> > As HW does not support to change the configuration dynamically. The
> device must be stopped and restarted if the configuration is changed. It's not
> very helpful to make it a dynamic configuration. We assume that the users
> can make their choice at the beginning and will not change it.
> 
> The problem is that the user has to recompile to switch between the two
> configurations. And it may not be an option for the user if he uses dpdk
> packaged by a distribution, for example.
> 
> Maybe I was not clear, but I don't mean to be able to switch mode while the
> port is started. I think it would be better to make it possible to switch mode
> at application startup time.
Yes, I understand the problem is the recompiling. But we think the users will not change it after they made decision. That's why's acceptable in previous drivers.
Agree it's better to remove all the compile configuration. Looks like that's what we're trying to do. We'd like to think about how to optimize it later.


> 
> >
> >>
> >> Having it dynamic (as a dev arg for instance) would make it possible
> >> to change the value when the user is using dpdk from a distro. It
> >> would also help testing coverage.
> >>
> >> Btw, how do you select this option with meson build system?
> > Not very familiar with meson. As I know, we can change the meson.build
> to add the configure.
> >
> 
> Ok, then please try to do it, because the legacy build system is going to be
> deprecated.