From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <danny.zhou@intel.com> Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AEFA9AB6 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 16:24:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Feb 2015 07:18:40 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.09,631,1418112000"; d="scan'208";a="689470033" Received: from pgsmsx107.gar.corp.intel.com ([10.221.44.105]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Feb 2015 07:24:16 -0800 Received: from shsmsx152.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.52) by PGSMSX107.gar.corp.intel.com (10.221.44.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 23:24:14 +0800 Received: from shsmsx104.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.5.161]) by SHSMSX152.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.6.46]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Mon, 23 Feb 2015 23:24:13 +0800 From: "Zhou, Danny" <danny.zhou@intel.com> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> Thread-Topic: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/5] eal: add per rx queue interrupt handling based on VFIO Thread-Index: AQHQTV7E/DHJ5wnUz0u1M4UeJBEYn5z+IH3Q//+XyACAAJywAP//glyAgACGbmA= Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 15:24:13 +0000 Message-ID: <DFDF335405C17848924A094BC35766CF0AAB3D4E@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1424353698-29837-1-git-send-email-danny.zhou@intel.com> <3509738.2W4po8ncMD@xps13> <DFDF335405C17848924A094BC35766CF0AAB3C60@SHSMSX104.ccr.corp.intel.com> <2740446.fpxNnYhYZp@xps13> In-Reply-To: <2740446.fpxNnYhYZp@xps13> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/5] eal: add per rx queue interrupt handling based on VFIO X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 15:24:20 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2015 11:19 PM > To: Zhou, Danny > Cc: Gonzalez Monroy, Sergio; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/5] eal: add per rx queue interrupt ha= ndling based on VFIO >=20 > 2015-02-23 15:02, Zhou, Danny: > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > 2015-02-23 11:47, Zhou, Danny: > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com] > > > > > 2015-02-19 21:48, Zhou Danny: > > > > > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/Makefile > > > > > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/linuxapp/eal/Makefile > > > > > > @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ CFLAGS +=3D -I$(SRCDIR)/include > > > > > > CFLAGS +=3D -I$(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_eal/common > > > > > > CFLAGS +=3D -I$(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_eal/common/include > > > > > > CFLAGS +=3D -I$(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_ring > > > > > > +CFLAGS +=3D -I$(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_mbuf > > > > > > CFLAGS +=3D -I$(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_mempool > > > > > > CFLAGS +=3D -I$(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_malloc > > > > > > CFLAGS +=3D -I$(RTE_SDK)/lib/librte_ether > > > > > > > > > > Why do we need mbuf in EAL? > > > > > > > > The file eal_interrupts.c includes rte_ethdev.h which defines struc= ture rte_eth_devices that > > > > eal needs to use in order to get per-port intr_handle. The rte_ethd= ev.h includes the rte_mbuf.h > > > > so the Makefile is updated here. > > > > > > I see. You are breaking layer isolation by introducing ethdev in EAL. > > > The cause seems to be: > > > > > > + struct rte_intr_handle intr_handle =3D > > > + rte_eth_devices[port_id].pci_dev->int= r_handle; > > > > > > Maybe that pci_dev should be a parameter of the function. > > > > Adding pci_dev as a parameter has similar problem due to eal does not i= nclude rte_pci.h which >=20 > I don't understand your assertion. rte_pci.h is part of EAL. >=20 rte_eal.h does not include any DPDK header file, adding pci_dev would force= it to include rte_pci.h file. With solution below, those kinds of mess could be completely avoided. > > defines struct rte_pci_device. It looks the new-added function rte_eal_= wait_rx_intr(uint8_t port_id, uint8_t queue_id); > > is not proper to be declared in rte_eal.h, will rename it to > > rte_intr_wait_rx (struct rte_intr_handle *intr_handle, uint8_t queue_i= d); > > > > and then move declaration from rte_eal.h to rte_interrupts.h. So isolat= ion can be avoided and no need to includes > rte_ethdev.h > > and change Makefile. >=20 > Yes could be better.