DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>
To: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
	Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>,
	dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] bus/pci: optimise scanning with whitelist/blacklist
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 11:15:59 +0000
Message-ID: <BY5PR18MB310517F3C49473962D6067C3B4D90@BY5PR18MB3105.namprd18.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJFAV8wLnUAeaied=X2qjHwQR6BN5dnwL5ifj1momGSLXpf2sA@mail.gmail.com>

Hello David,

Answers inline.

Regards
Sunil Kumar Kori

>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
>Sent: Friday, April 17, 2020 2:14 PM
>To: Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>
>Cc: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>; Jerin Jacob
>Kollanukkaran <jerinj@marvell.com>; dev <dev@dpdk.org>
>Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] bus/pci: optimise scanning with
>whitelist/blacklist
>
>External Email
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 11:29 AM Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>
>wrote:
>>
>> rte_bus_scan API scans all the available PCI devices irrespective of
>> white or black listing parameters then further devices are probed
>> based on white or black listing parameters. So unnecessary CPU cycles
>> are wasted during rte_pci_scan.
>>
>> For Octeontx2 platform with core frequency 2.4 Ghz, rte_bus_scan
>> consumes around 26ms to scan around 90 PCI devices but all may not be
>> used by the application. So for the application which uses 2 NICs,
>> rte_bus_scan consumes few microseconds and rest time is saved with this
>patch.
>>
>> Patch restricts devices to be scanned as per below mentioned conditions:
>>  - All devices will be scanned if no parameters are passed.
>>  - Only white listed devices will be scanned if white list is available.
>>  - All devices, except black listed, will be scanned if black list is
>>    available.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sunil Kumar Kori <skori@marvell.com>
>> ---
>> v2:
>>  - Added function to validate ignorance of device based on PCI address.
>
>First you objected to Stephen comment, and later announced there was no
>objection.
Please refer: https://patches.dpdk.org/patch/63924/. In first reply to Stephen's comment, Itself I said that I agree with that approach and why I have not taken that path is also mentioned,
and requested for suggestions. But there were no further inputs after asking multiple times then I thought no one has any concern and then I asked to get it merged for 20.05.

>
>Now, it seems you ignored what I replied without any explanation.
>So tell me, what was wrong with
>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_david-
>2Dmarchand_dpdk_commit_e7860231ecdce91f9f70027d4090a7057b8fd5f7&
>d=DwIFaQ&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=dXeXaAMkP5COgn1zxHMyaF1_d
>9IIuq6vHQO6NrIPjaE&m=3nE0hIIwz2cXBpYrewLujeRWz5WPE7LB9j_HvOtBd68
>&s=OjPCDnof_PNgATyzPIbjG8EtSYa5fE4EwbLD0oaIw5w&e=
No, Neither I have ignored your code changes nor denied. Both submitted patches uses similar approaches having one difference only that is you modified existing functions and I have written the new without touching the existing one.  I have already explained in v1 that why I have not taken that path what you have implemented. 
Also I thought, its not good to change pci_ignore_device and pci_devargs_lookup because in future if more parameters (part of rte_pci_device structure) are considered to ignore a device then again we have to change this function to support it. 
It may be a rare case but it was one thought process.

>?
>
>
>>  - Marked device validation function as experimental.
>
>Useless, this symbol is internal and not exported.
>
>
>--
>David Marchand


  reply	other threads:[~2020-04-17 11:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-16  7:55 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] bus/pci: restricted bus scanning to allowed devices Sunil Kumar Kori
2019-12-16 16:13 ` Stephen Hemminger
2019-12-17 11:00   ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-01-21  8:39     ` Sunil Kumar Kori
     [not found]       ` <MN2PR18MB327936807460D9F2AE4894F3B40F0@MN2PR18MB3279.namprd18.prod.outlook.com>
2020-02-27  8:30         ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-03-09  6:06           ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-06  9:32             ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-06 13:21               ` David Marchand
2020-04-07  9:21                 ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-07  9:28 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/1] bus/pci: optimise scanning with whitelist/blacklist Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-17  8:30   ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-17  8:44   ` David Marchand
2020-04-17 11:15     ` Sunil Kumar Kori [this message]
2020-04-17 13:25       ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " David Marchand
2020-04-17 15:12         ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-17 15:35           ` David Marchand
2020-04-17 16:00             ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-20  6:59               ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-20  6:55   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-21 15:18     ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-04-22  6:17       ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-22  9:38         ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-04-23  7:47           ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-04-27 18:43     ` [dpdk-dev] " Gaëtan Rivet
2020-04-28 13:52       ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-01 11:39     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-01 12:40       ` Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-01 21:00       ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-05-02  7:20         ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-02  7:42       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-02 11:27         ` Gaëtan Rivet
2020-05-04 14:17         ` David Marchand
2020-05-05  5:57           ` [dpdk-dev] [EXT] " Sunil Kumar Kori
2020-05-06 12:54           ` [dpdk-dev] " David Marchand
2020-05-11 14:59         ` 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=BY5PR18MB310517F3C49473962D6067C3B4D90@BY5PR18MB3105.namprd18.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=skori@marvell.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=jerinj@marvell.com \
    --cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
    /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