From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F1B2A04F6; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 11:26:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4DF72C6A; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 11:26:36 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com (mail-io1-f68.google.com [209.85.166.68]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF41F1D9E for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 11:26:34 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id x1so22100292iop.7 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 02:26:34 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LuTPucGq1pYCgY/2qFjju2Z3yKm0r+uyupeTVIVgYZE=; b=LXMvXZB8+DNgX2ULNE5wf9BQfqlRH2kpqIkF4kPDO9nYcXWDiVDb77p1fbhPnfwkwk iJSmA5whB7xNFOS+eCce1heN1NJpIRCpM8wuphucAfdvMkRSAnXufFaz+KGLHaNR4hQ4 F8L1AgVWSFfiSUYSlLk3DWxdKYTiJII90w3u0/MQ4Jqk+Ro3eIGqj5hV2NyngjdN2Nx3 TPVWpwOceY6Ut2+j48cp8ZOtPbH+7coshg2upcyfNQRoAyFyvbQ8WfIIlNcVEwwXrmR4 PtGzoFQEOylM5JFuiHgSWjC2hx7q1uUdY0fJvjzW8W6sIZGv+4lhCVkAk5K6EYYFJoJ2 UxgA== 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=LuTPucGq1pYCgY/2qFjju2Z3yKm0r+uyupeTVIVgYZE=; b=CHSI5d8NA5zKZYwRv34LYpy/FEpGtvHAnB73aK2WrUSOUsk/HFVOPqgv8Fmb81oeFu QznrWIDh3M4gJ7FPNkWWTEXMDEvGE5WgiKHvCDRZUjXcaRMCJDuZM9bWcl98fbdFbH1A lG8Vxkjf65KMRIfKd5dfK3tXFNtBrPmb5UiyToA+0tcRhsSkHvTG/8HSRnhsEq+Nr3sp g8s/H0ogsY+rTlYVmV+6hhpgofG9J4k3bCVaaT05FBvs+VZiICLrVA+xg80zxA+gnD58 YsGjKFPg+2vEQyROaS6NSynhFEcSVUZwMwMdpcQioergpWVij9cTd6JHDBXbZZYX9GjO WqMA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVQEkUaI6IyUIw5ORpFjN9InpB1jdMqZF14QbU1xslhbvfJnif+ Fv3LnNmIvUhRCHC+pVotmEAgpTE5kcB0gUx4oR0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyrpVbN+q1yy8LxnL4DE0W/DzntEhUjx8Azyrbn5ACqTJ/nB0wq7jHsp6TXzS/al2ZbTYC5he6nFG0Hjcd0ubg= X-Received: by 2002:a5e:8349:: with SMTP id y9mr2004506iom.271.1576059993929; Wed, 11 Dec 2019 02:26:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191211053009.14906-1-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com> <BN7PR11MB2547351B8955754B08C5A3529A5A0@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> In-Reply-To: <BN7PR11MB2547351B8955754B08C5A3529A5A0@BN7PR11MB2547.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjacobk@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2019 15:56:17 +0530 Message-ID: <CALBAE1NMyBv+_B9-J8CNO67Rz7H8cFp7592hkgKE2U+SOYFFjQ@mail.gmail.com> To: "Ananyev, Konstantin" <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> Cc: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Jun Yang <jun.yang@nxp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: support unequal number of RXQ and TXQ X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://mails.dpdk.org/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 3:29 PM Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dev <dev-bounces@dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Hemant Agrawal > > Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2019 5:30 AM > > To: dev@dpdk.org > > Cc: Jun Yang <jun.yang@nxp.com> > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] app/testpmd: support unequal number of RXQ and TXQ > > > > From: Jun Yang <jun.yang@nxp.com> > > > > The existing forwarding mode usages the total number of > > queues as the minimum of rxq and txq. > > It finds the txq as the same index as rxq. > > However in some scenarios, specially for flow control > > the number of rxq and txq can be different. > > This patch maxes the txq and function of rxq for all such > > scenario instead of keeping 1:1 relationship between the two. > > > > Now packets from all RXQs can be forwarded to TXQs Allow this feature only for DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MT_LOCKFREE devices. Please probe DEV_TX_OFFLOAD_MT_LOCKFREE() capability first to avoid breaking contract on the other devices. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jun Yang <jun.yang@nxp.com> > > --- > > app/test-pmd/config.c | 4 +--- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/app/test-pmd/config.c b/app/test-pmd/config.c > > index d59968278..efa409453 100644 > > --- a/app/test-pmd/config.c > > +++ b/app/test-pmd/config.c > > @@ -2130,8 +2130,6 @@ rss_fwd_config_setup(void) > > streamid_t sm_id; > > > > nb_q = nb_rxq; > > - if (nb_q > nb_txq) > > - nb_q = nb_txq; > > cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_lcores = (lcoreid_t) nb_fwd_lcores; > > cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_ports = nb_fwd_ports; > > cur_fwd_config.nb_fwd_streams = > > @@ -2154,7 +2152,7 @@ rss_fwd_config_setup(void) > > fs->rx_port = fwd_ports_ids[rxp]; > > fs->rx_queue = rxq; > > fs->tx_port = fwd_ports_ids[txp]; > > - fs->tx_queue = rxq; > > + fs->tx_queue = (rxq % nb_txq); > > But does it mean that now 2 lcores cah use the same TX queue? > If so, then how it supposed to work? See above. > > > fs->peer_addr = fs->tx_port; > > fs->retry_enabled = retry_enabled; > > rxp++; > > -- > > 2.17.1 >