DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
To: Olivier Matz <olivier.matz@6wind.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>,
	"arybchenko@solarflare.com" <arybchenko@solarflare.com>,
	"jielong.zjl@antfin.com" <jielong.zjl@antfin.com>,
	"Eads, Gage" <gage.eads@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mempool/ring: add support for new ring sync modes
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2020 16:29:32 +0000
Message-ID: <BYAPR11MB3301E7E88177F3CDCABA16A69A600@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200713150049.GR5869@platinum>


> On Mon, Jul 13, 2020 at 02:46:35PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > Hi Olivier,
> >
> > > Hi Konstantin,
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 03:20:12PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Konstantin,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 05:55:30PM +0000, Ananyev, Konstantin wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi Olivier,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Konstantin,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 05:10:24PM +0100, Konstantin Ananyev wrote:
> > > > > > > > > v2:
> > > > > > > > >  - update Release Notes (as per comments)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Two new sync modes were introduced into rte_ring:
> > > > > > > > > relaxed tail sync (RTS) and head/tail sync (HTS).
> > > > > > > > > This change provides user with ability to select these
> > > > > > > > > modes for ring based mempool via mempool ops API.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com>
> > > > > > > > > Acked-by: Gage Eads <gage.eads@intel.com>
> > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > >  doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst  |  6 ++
> > > > > > > > >  drivers/mempool/ring/rte_mempool_ring.c | 97 ++++++++++++++++++++++---
> > > > > > > > >  2 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst
> > > > > > > > > index eaaf11c37..7bdcf3aac 100644
> > > > > > > > > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst
> > > > > > > > > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/release_20_08.rst
> > > > > > > > > @@ -84,6 +84,12 @@ New Features
> > > > > > > > >    * Dump ``rte_flow`` memory consumption.
> > > > > > > > >    * Measure packet per second forwarding.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +* **Added support for new sync modes into mempool ring driver.**
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > +  Added ability to select new ring synchronisation modes:
> > > > > > > > > +  ``relaxed tail sync (ring_mt_rts)`` and ``head/tail sync (ring_mt_hts)``
> > > > > > > > > +  via mempool ops API.
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >  Removed Items
> > > > > > > > >  -------------
> > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mempool/ring/rte_mempool_ring.c b/drivers/mempool/ring/rte_mempool_ring.c
> > > > > > > > > index bc123fc52..15ec7dee7 100644
> > > > > > > > > --- a/drivers/mempool/ring/rte_mempool_ring.c
> > > > > > > > > +++ b/drivers/mempool/ring/rte_mempool_ring.c
> > > > > > > > > @@ -25,6 +25,22 @@ common_ring_sp_enqueue(struct rte_mempool *mp, void * const *obj_table,
> > > > > > > > >  			obj_table, n, NULL) == 0 ? -ENOBUFS : 0;
> > > > > > > > >  }
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > > > > +rts_ring_mp_enqueue(struct rte_mempool *mp, void * const *obj_table,
> > > > > > > > > +	unsigned int n)
> > > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > > +	return rte_ring_mp_rts_enqueue_bulk(mp->pool_data,
> > > > > > > > > +			obj_table, n, NULL) == 0 ? -ENOBUFS : 0;
> > > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > > > > +hts_ring_mp_enqueue(struct rte_mempool *mp, void * const *obj_table,
> > > > > > > > > +	unsigned int n)
> > > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > > +	return rte_ring_mp_hts_enqueue_bulk(mp->pool_data,
> > > > > > > > > +			obj_table, n, NULL) == 0 ? -ENOBUFS : 0;
> > > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > >  static int
> > > > > > > > >  common_ring_mc_dequeue(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table, unsigned n)
> > > > > > > > >  {
> > > > > > > > > @@ -39,17 +55,30 @@ common_ring_sc_dequeue(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table, unsigned n)
> > > > > > > > >  			obj_table, n, NULL) == 0 ? -ENOBUFS : 0;
> > > > > > > > >  }
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > > > > +rts_ring_mc_dequeue(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table, unsigned int n)
> > > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > > +	return rte_ring_mc_rts_dequeue_bulk(mp->pool_data,
> > > > > > > > > +			obj_table, n, NULL) == 0 ? -ENOBUFS : 0;
> > > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > > > > +hts_ring_mc_dequeue(struct rte_mempool *mp, void **obj_table, unsigned int n)
> > > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > > +	return rte_ring_mc_hts_dequeue_bulk(mp->pool_data,
> > > > > > > > > +			obj_table, n, NULL) == 0 ? -ENOBUFS : 0;
> > > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > >  static unsigned
> > > > > > > > >  common_ring_get_count(const struct rte_mempool *mp)
> > > > > > > > >  {
> > > > > > > > >  	return rte_ring_count(mp->pool_data);
> > > > > > > > >  }
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > >  static int
> > > > > > > > > -common_ring_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
> > > > > > > > > +ring_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp, uint32_t rg_flags)
> > > > > > > > >  {
> > > > > > > > > -	int rg_flags = 0, ret;
> > > > > > > > > +	int ret;
> > > > > > > > >  	char rg_name[RTE_RING_NAMESIZE];
> > > > > > > > >  	struct rte_ring *r;
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > @@ -60,12 +89,6 @@ common_ring_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
> > > > > > > > >  		return -rte_errno;
> > > > > > > > >  	}
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > -	/* ring flags */
> > > > > > > > > -	if (mp->flags & MEMPOOL_F_SP_PUT)
> > > > > > > > > -		rg_flags |= RING_F_SP_ENQ;
> > > > > > > > > -	if (mp->flags & MEMPOOL_F_SC_GET)
> > > > > > > > > -		rg_flags |= RING_F_SC_DEQ;
> > > > > > > > > -
> > > > > > > > >  	/*
> > > > > > > > >  	 * Allocate the ring that will be used to store objects.
> > > > > > > > >  	 * Ring functions will return appropriate errors if we are
> > > > > > > > > @@ -82,6 +105,40 @@ common_ring_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
> > > > > > > > >  	return 0;
> > > > > > > > >  }
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > > > > +common_ring_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
> > > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > > +	uint32_t rg_flags;
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > +	rg_flags = 0;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Maybe it could go on the same line
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > +	/* ring flags */
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Not sure we need to keep this comment
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > +	if (mp->flags & MEMPOOL_F_SP_PUT)
> > > > > > > > > +		rg_flags |= RING_F_SP_ENQ;
> > > > > > > > > +	if (mp->flags & MEMPOOL_F_SC_GET)
> > > > > > > > > +		rg_flags |= RING_F_SC_DEQ;
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > +	return ring_alloc(mp, rg_flags);
> > > > > > > > > +}
> > > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > > +static int
> > > > > > > > > +rts_ring_alloc(struct rte_mempool *mp)
> > > > > > > > > +{
> > > > > > > > > +	if ((mp->flags & (MEMPOOL_F_SP_PUT | MEMPOOL_F_SC_GET)) != 0)
> > > > > > > > > +		return -EINVAL;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Why do we need this? It is a problem to allow sc/sp in this mode (even
> > > > > > > > if it's not optimal)?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > These new sync modes (RTS, HTS) are for MT.
> > > > > > > For SP/SC - there is simply no point to use MT sync modes.
> > > > > > > I suppose there are few choices:
> > > > > > > 1. Make F_SP_PUT/F_SC_GET flags silently override expected ops behaviour
> > > > > > >    and create actual ring with ST sync mode for prod/cons.
> > > > > > > 2. Report an error.
> > > > > > > 3. Silently ignore these flags.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > As I can see for  "ring_mp_mc" ops, we doing #1,
> > > > > > > while for "stack" we are doing #3.
> > > > > > > For RTS/HTS I chosoe #2, as it seems cleaner to me.
> > > > > > > Any thoughts from your side what preferable behaviour should be?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The F_SP_PUT/F_SC_GET are only used in rte_mempool_create() to select
> > > > > > the default ops among (ring_sp_sc, ring_mp_sc, ring_sp_mc,
> > > > > > ring_mp_mc).
> > > > >
> > > > > As I understand, nothing prevents user from doing:
> > > > >
> > > > > mp = rte_mempool_create_empty(name, n, elt_size, cache_size,
> > > > >                  sizeof(struct rte_pktmbuf_pool_private), socket_id, 0);
> > > >
> > > > Apologies, hit send accidently.
> > > > I meant user can do:
> > > >
> > > > mp = rte_mempool_create_empty(..., F_SP_PUT | F_SC_GET);
> > > > rte_mempool_set_ops_byname(mp, "ring_mp_mc", NULL);
> > > >
> > > > An in that case, he'll get SP/SC ring underneath.
> > >
> > > It looks it's not the case. Since commit 449c49b93a6b ("mempool: support
> > > handler operations"), the flags SP_PUT/SC_GET are converted into a call
> > > to rte_mempool_set_ops_byname() in rte_mempool_create() only.
> > >
> > > In rte_mempool_create_empty(), these flags are ignored. It is expected
> > > that the user calls rte_mempool_set_ops_byname() by itself.
> >
> > As I understand the code - not exactly.
> > rte_mempool_create_empty() doesn't make any specific actions based on 'flags' value,
> > but it does store it's value inside mp->flags.
> > Later, when mempool_ops_alloc_once() is called these flags will be used by
> > common_ring_alloc() and might override selected by ops ring behaviour.
> >
> > >
> > > I don't think it is a good behavior:
> > >
> > > 1/ The documentation of rte_mempool_create_empty() does not say that the
> > >    flags are ignored, and a user can expect that F_SP_PUT | F_SC_GET
> > >    sets the default ops like rte_mempool_create().
> > >
> > > 2/ If rte_mempool_set_ops_byname() is not called after
> > >    rte_mempool_create_empty() (and it looks it happens in dpdk's code),
> > >    the default ops are the ones registered at index 0. This depends on
> > >    the link order.
> > >
> > > So I propose to move the following code in
> > > rte_mempool_create_empty().
> > >
> > > 	if ((flags & MEMPOOL_F_SP_PUT) && (flags & MEMPOOL_F_SC_GET))
> > > 		ret = rte_mempool_set_ops_byname(mp, "ring_sp_sc", NULL);
> > > 	else if (flags & MEMPOOL_F_SP_PUT)
> > > 		ret = rte_mempool_set_ops_byname(mp, "ring_sp_mc", NULL);
> > > 	else if (flags & MEMPOOL_F_SC_GET)
> > > 		ret = rte_mempool_set_ops_byname(mp, "ring_mp_sc", NULL);
> > > 	else
> > > 		ret = rte_mempool_set_ops_byname(mp, "ring_mp_mc", NULL);
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> >
> > I think it will be a good thing - as in that case we'll always have
> > "ring_mp_mc" selected as default one.
> > As another thought, it porbably would be good to deprecate and later remove
> > MEMPOOL_F_SP_PUT and MEMPOOL_F_SC_GET completely.
> > These days user can select this behaviour via mempool ops and such dualism
> > just makes things more error-prone and harder to maintain.
> > Especially as we don't have clear policy what should be the higher priority
> > for sync mode selection: mempool ops or flags.
> >
> 
> I'll tend to agree, however it would mean deprecate rte_mempool_create()
> too, because we wouldn't be able to set ops with it. Or we would have to
> add a 12th (!) argument to the function, to set the ops name.
> 
> I don't like having that many arguments to this function, but it seems
> it is widely used, probably because it is just one function call (vs
> create_empty + set_ops + populate). So adding a "ops_name" argument is
> maybe the right thing to do, given we can keep abi compat.

My thought was - just keep rte_mempool_create()
parameter list as it is, and always set ops to "ring_mp_mc" for it.
Users who'd like some other ops would force to use
create_empty+set_ops+populate.
That's pretty much the same what we have right now,
the only diff will be ring with SP/SC mode.

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-13 16:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-21 13:20 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 20.08] " Konstantin Ananyev
2020-06-29 16:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-09 16:18   ` Olivier Matz
2020-07-09 17:55     ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-10 12:52       ` Olivier Matz
2020-07-10 15:15         ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-10 15:20           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-13 13:30             ` Olivier Matz
2020-07-13 14:46               ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-13 15:00                 ` Olivier Matz
2020-07-13 16:29                   ` Ananyev, Konstantin [this message]
2020-07-10 16:21   ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] " Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-10 22:44     ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-07-13 12:58       ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-13 13:57         ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-07-13 15:50     ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 0/2] " Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-13 15:50       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 1/2] doc: add ring based mempool guide Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-13 15:50       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/2] mempool/ring: add support for new ring sync modes Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-13 17:37         ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-07-14  9:16           ` Ananyev, Konstantin
2020-07-15  9:59             ` Thomas Monjalon
2020-07-15 14:58       ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 0/2] " Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-15 14:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/2] doc: add ring based mempool guide Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-15 14:58         ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/2] mempool/ring: add support for new ring sync modes Konstantin Ananyev
2020-07-21 17:25           ` 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=BYAPR11MB3301E7E88177F3CDCABA16A69A600@BYAPR11MB3301.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=konstantin.ananyev@intel.com \
    --cc=arybchenko@solarflare.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=gage.eads@intel.com \
    --cc=jielong.zjl@antfin.com \
    --cc=olivier.matz@6wind.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