From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17A9A051F; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:19:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E0CC1BF46; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:19:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0DF1BF3C for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:19:56 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1591802396; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=PmDDD5Jp/sQLZ4w6H6yVChoxW+qp5tb2Oa1tA2R7cas=; b=c6VPRl2eoDNs5K/VjoIhhUma4dP+BhhKLJnidqojRUiEK2ebXptOnZ2eCp/Ms4/8CMZQnK 4S2QLhSsQClYR0nWS1ED0CRq5/DBO8nEfU87aqNMEXTxWYYwNld8rtYxb0V46F5CU8E95E CaKaQfYlSYkaWv6ilDd38jEzY89xY5E= Received: from mail-vk1-f199.google.com (mail-vk1-f199.google.com [209.85.221.199]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-309-68rwPBlsNK2xm7-nzbEKLg-1; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 11:18:37 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 68rwPBlsNK2xm7-nzbEKLg-1 Received: by mail-vk1-f199.google.com with SMTP id b10so618788vkn.22 for ; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:18:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PmDDD5Jp/sQLZ4w6H6yVChoxW+qp5tb2Oa1tA2R7cas=; b=O8LaR2C9E+RTaihpY53msR8ABYZAcPRh5WbmKrKSG7u177zhuI8XVFNCAYIE1Q0pY2 Xo0NQPtGxV9UtPBWFUnIFADQ7ZPl0ZwthTySce0LN2c7zFIi4YDYo6J/lSJgsFaWoO+v sUH3sL19tB+MWoLg7697qbiivSVykQOlMq/MYUoLqFc2IEnGkq34uTDFoP7AWOtoeOoJ JijnkpOQd6o/jDTt8p7x0eQJ08+ZV2kBT2yLqcbjbgdJe5CySAyg/G3fQ6nvw38Er2sF dX3FBvLlzxpJF0FiK2YnlKtpgmbbGoTFxSEFJ+ta3C/bVrWpqBVXZUAXjutY+m2hybmD YUxw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530fyVC9A7/i3qm8M/md1lEXoO0bx+fo1d2E3AN4Dpe2BgmF7tlE MaAixjxVsEMPGCTnyEpTedZBxxhaJ7HfSoA3kvl+cj/yU6fgoW1wsP9hqLSLm5q8+hM6w1OWcTF bbJqZAP4243gIgDoAmLw= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:2636:: with SMTP id 51mr3053699uag.41.1591802316653; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:18:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzLyhzJhdjNpkTFFAdb3IyKBpyKJJThaTq7XKK0dt3WC7XofLxgHAEfYCpKWu9q9ThO3eLp1aQL/mReyv+MYUY= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:2636:: with SMTP id 51mr3053656uag.41.1591802316063; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:18:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200610144506.30505-1-david.marchand@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: David Marchand Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 17:18:25 +0200 Message-ID: To: Jerin Jacob Cc: dpdk-dev X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/7] Register external threads as lcore X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 5:09 PM Jerin Jacob wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 8:15 PM David Marchand > wrote: > > > > OVS and some other applications have been hacking into DPDK internals to > > fake EAL threads and avoid performance penalty of only having non-EAL > > threads. > > > > This series proposes to add a new type of lcores and maps those external > > threads to such lcores. > > Those threads won't run the DPDK eal mainloop and as a consequence part of > > the EAL threads API cannot work. > > > > Having new lcores appearing during the process lifetime is not expected > > by some DPDK components. This is addressed by notifying of such lcore > > hotplug. > > > > This patchset has still some more work (like refusing new lcore type in > > incompatible EAL threads API, updating the documentation and adding unit > > tests) but I am sending it anyway as I would like to get this in for > > 20.08. > > Cool feature. > > Is mempool's lcore local cache working for external cores with this scheme? Yes, as it is stateless, all we need is a unique lcore_id in [0, RTE_MAX_LCORE-1] range. We could imagine flushing such caches on unregistering. And we can fix other mempool drivers like the bucket driver. -- David Marchand