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 40866A053A; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:33:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5369E2BA8; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:33:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f68.google.com (mail-io1-f68.google.com [209.85.166.68]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3CC52AB for ; Tue, 4 Aug 2020 15:33:15 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f68.google.com with SMTP id a5so26923369ioa.13 for ; Tue, 04 Aug 2020 06:33:15 -0700 (PDT) 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=dtb5t0h5fa8eR4w8pQ0r62NV12eu0y4CnAaRGVqTEec=; b=MetyDw9SC/iWpwD/ivu/CK2RXxVY3p2k67XReb0GZ6bZRknmU5uy9qnUtENHaik1nr XZRD6jCqRMXzQ+ykZMoRz8iUTYTghI0+wwyMJUSoTHYRlwlbH21trvcgcax5PQ/tWj0V 48N3s5tsVhF2w/h3/wLfUeQCh7L2TgU3DE4lC6DwuZTqhQEkfhH7tYhqj+PVQFDniutZ oS5fZUZ2RTR3ZpYTPDBw8GZ3GTUwLU7vamIDMEVBS8LIAlVufxQKOhdMmmydzYbjTZKG s0JMOyKJzXWKfantw29aDXABCPBGYQNCv3i/Y3N4igU3DKhyVhyakYt+jorGUcIiODGE o9Eg== 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=dtb5t0h5fa8eR4w8pQ0r62NV12eu0y4CnAaRGVqTEec=; b=eARCmqbQatlog2E03qxXu3id1DCW8Gi26jCvuzypeJK2UHfUjc1WzZqffOLl/2pa7c Rirra2unoVkqNqGgKUk5zeHjlPVYAjyUslWbYK25R/SY4C/EyacpIqpDoskeuY3o55UT cjD0t/8Vy3GzuyBwh6rRo0vQT2jwrvuJZ2Md4BURMFmNBKp80OGCFilnfWCNxdUnxlkP ccTS6jPx3X6E5GwcncP5lPQrnE/SZBRqC4ayjCqeD/iQMkkkh5evhzhkIq35RaWs+zCr 4D/0QC5lnTBuf/mkDrtxONhJnU/GL6vVcDldHxkm//jisQSBBJ27UTfsdEg2MGZnbJQG ODrQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ybup6z222CIoCwuQ9ucHwuNbbmM0ndyFvzhuT0XlVnQk2FJWq u8qrbcw+gaCDnQr4UZ3XvlDzbsDPKBrYNHonRWI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzD0LSqC+GImLCNRBF0aUatir1honAuG3XYUFqqDPQyGx1RK+vFSKtAnupOPVQVq/reZJy4fYGdHUWABUyya1s= X-Received: by 2002:a5e:9247:: with SMTP id z7mr5242608iop.1.1596547994935; Tue, 04 Aug 2020 06:33:14 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1596452291-25535-1-git-send-email-viacheslavo@mellanox.com> In-Reply-To: From: Jerin Jacob Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2020 19:02:58 +0530 Message-ID: To: Slava Ovsiienko Cc: dpdk-dev , Matan Azrad , Raslan Darawsheh , Thomas Monjalon , Ferruh Yigit , Stephen Hemminger , Andrew Rybchenko , Ajit Khaparde , Maxime Coquelin , Olivier Matz , David Marchand Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure 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 Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 6:36 PM Slava Ovsiienko wrote: > > Hi, Jerin, > > Thanks for the comment, please, see below. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jerin Jacob > > Sent: Monday, August 3, 2020 14:57 > > To: Slava Ovsiienko > > Cc: dpdk-dev ; Matan Azrad ; > > Raslan Darawsheh ; Thomas Monjalon > > ; Ferruh Yigit ; Stephen > > Hemminger ; Andrew Rybchenko > > ; Ajit Khaparde > > ; Maxime Coquelin > > ; Olivier Matz ; > > David Marchand > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: announce changes to ethdev rxconf structure > > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2020 at 4:28 PM Viacheslav Ovsiienko > > wrote: > > > > > > The DPDK datapath in the transmit direction is very flexible. > > > The applications can build multisegment packets and manages almost all > > > data aspects - the memory pools where segments are allocated from, the > > > segment lengths, the memory attributes like external, registered, etc. > > > > > > In the receiving direction, the datapath is much less flexible, the > > > applications can only specify the memory pool to configure the > > > receiving queue and nothing more. In order to extend the receiving > > > datapath capabilities it is proposed to add the new fields into > > > rte_eth_rxconf structure: > > > > > > struct rte_eth_rxconf { > > > ... > > > uint16_t rx_split_num; /* number of segments to split */ > > > uint16_t *rx_split_len; /* array of segment lengthes */ > > > struct rte_mempool **mp; /* array of segment memory pools */ > > > > The pool has the packet length it's been configured for. > > So I think, rx_split_len can be removed. > > Yes, it is one of the supposed options - if pointer to array of segment lengths > is NULL , the queue_setup() could use the lengths from the pool's properties. > But we are talking about packet split, in general, it should not depend > on pool properties. What if application provides the single pool > and just wants to have the tunnel header in the first dedicated mbuf? > > > > > This feature also available in Marvell HW. So it not specific to one vendor. > > Maybe we could just the use case mention the use case in the depreciation > > notice and the tentative change in rte_eth_rxconf and exact details can be > > worked out at the time of implementation. > > > So, if I understand correctly, the struct changes in the commit message > should be marked as just possible implementation? Yes. We may need to have a detailed discussion on the correct abstraction for various HW is available with this feature. On Marvell HW, We can configure TWO pools for given eth Rx queue. One pool can be configured as a small packet pool and other one as large packet pool. And there is a threshold value to decide the pool between small and large. For example: - The small pool is configured 2k - The large pool is configured with 10k - And if the threshold value is configured as 2k. Any packet size <=2K will land in small pool and others in a large pool. The use case, we are targeting is to save the memory space for jumbo frames. If you can share the MLX HW working model, Then we can find the correct abstraction. > > With best regards, > Slava > > > With the above change: > > Acked-by: Jerin Jacob > > > > > > > ... > > > }; > > > > > > The non-zero value of rx_split_num field configures the receiving > > > queue to split ingress packets into multiple segments to the mbufs > > > allocated from various memory pools according to the specified > > > lengths. The zero value of rx_split_num field provides the backward > > > compatibility and queue should be configured in a regular way (with > > > single/multiple mbufs of the same data buffer length allocated from > > > the single memory pool). > > > > > > The new approach would allow splitting the ingress packets into > > > multiple parts pushed to the memory with different attributes. > > > For example, the packet headers can be pushed to the embedded data > > > buffers within mbufs and the application data into the external > > > buffers attached to mbufs allocated from the different memory pools. > > > The memory attributes for the split parts may differ either - for > > > example the application data may be pushed into the external memory > > > located on the dedicated physical device, say GPU or NVMe. This would > > > improve the DPDK receiving datapath flexibility preserving > > > compatibility with existing API. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Viacheslav Ovsiienko > > > --- > > > doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst | 5 +++++ > > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > > > b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > > > index ea4cfa7..cd700ae 100644 > > > --- a/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > > > +++ b/doc/guides/rel_notes/deprecation.rst > > > @@ -99,6 +99,11 @@ Deprecation Notices > > > In 19.11 PMDs will still update the field even when the offload is not > > > enabled. > > > > > > +* ethdev: add new fields to ``rte_eth_rxconf`` to configure the > > > +receiving > > > + queues to split ingress packets into multiple segments according to > > > +the > > > + specified lengths into the buffers allocated from the specified > > > + memory pools. The backward compatibility to existing API is preserved. > > > + > > > * ethdev: ``rx_descriptor_done`` dev_ops and > > ``rte_eth_rx_descriptor_done`` > > > will be deprecated in 20.11 and will be removed in 21.11. > > > Existing ``rte_eth_rx_descriptor_status`` and > > > ``rte_eth_tx_descriptor_status`` > > > -- > > > 1.8.3.1 > > >