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 4B390A318B for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 04:47:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D8831E53E; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 04:47:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A97001E4E1 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 04:47:55 +0200 (CEST) X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga005.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.32]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Oct 2019 19:47:54 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.67,310,1566889200"; d="scan'208";a="396478032" Received: from fmsmsx106.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.18.124.204]) by fmsmga005.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 17 Oct 2019 19:47:53 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx605.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.126.85) by FMSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.124.204) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.439.0; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 19:47:53 -0700 Received: from fmsmsx605.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.126.85) by fmsmsx605.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.126.85) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 19:47:53 -0700 Received: from shsmsx151.ccr.corp.intel.com (10.239.6.50) by fmsmsx605.amr.corp.intel.com (10.18.126.85) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256) id 15.1.1713.5 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 17 Oct 2019 19:47:53 -0700 Received: from shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.176]) by SHSMSX151.ccr.corp.intel.com ([10.239.6.50]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 10:47:51 +0800 From: "Wang, Haiyue" To: Olivier Matz , "dev@dpdk.org" CC: Andrew Rybchenko , "Richardson, Bruce" , Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran , "Wiles, Keith" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Morten_Br=F8rup?= , Stephen Hemminger , Thomas Monjalon Thread-Topic: [PATCH v2] mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags Thread-Index: AQHVhPkmy3Bf3WM2d0mLozWwBzvtDqdfncww Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 02:47:50 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20190710092907.5565-1-olivier.matz@6wind.com> <20191017144219.32708-1-olivier.matz@6wind.com> In-Reply-To: <20191017144219.32708-1-olivier.matz@6wind.com> Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNjkyNDY3ZGYtMzAxYy00OGMyLWJhY2MtZmFjZjE5NTBhN2MzIiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX05UIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE3LjEwLjE4MDQuNDkiLCJUcnVzdGVkTGFiZWxIYXNoIjoielpsbWR4azBxV3VNbTRJN3Y3S1J2SnU5TTRZa0pjUG5YT2ZUS3JpQVI5ZmNGYW1hZnk3VUd6YjdEZFAwMjV6dCJ9 x-ctpclassification: CTP_NT dlp-product: dlpe-windows dlp-version: 11.2.0.6 dlp-reaction: no-action x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags 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" Hi Olivier > -----Original Message----- > From: Olivier Matz [mailto:olivier.matz@6wind.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2019 22:42 > To: dev@dpdk.org > Cc: Andrew Rybchenko ; Richardson, Bruce ; Wang, > Haiyue ; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran ; Wiles, Keith > ; Ananyev, Konstantin ; Morten Br=F8rup > ; Stephen Hemminger ; Thomas Monjalon > > Subject: [PATCH v2] mbuf: support dynamic fields and flags >=20 > Many features require to store data inside the mbuf. As the room in mbuf > structure is limited, it is not possible to have a field for each > feature. Also, changing fields in the mbuf structure can break the API > or ABI. >=20 > This commit addresses these issues, by enabling the dynamic registration > of fields or flags: >=20 > - a dynamic field is a named area in the rte_mbuf structure, with a > given size (>=3D 1 byte) and alignment constraint. > - a dynamic flag is a named bit in the rte_mbuf structure. >=20 > The typical use case is a PMD that registers space for an offload > feature, when the application requests to enable this feature. As > the space in mbuf is limited, the space should only be reserved if it > is going to be used (i.e when the application explicitly asks for it). >=20 > The registration can be done at any moment, but it is not possible > to unregister fields or flags for now. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Olivier Matz > Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon > --- >=20 > v2 >=20 > * Rebase on top of master: solve conflict with Stephen's patchset > (packet copy) > * Add new apis to register a dynamic field/flag at a specific place > * Add a dump function (sugg by David) > * Enhance field registration function to select the best offset, keeping > large aligned zones as much as possible (sugg by Konstantin) > * Use a size_t and unsigned int instead of int when relevant > (sugg by Konstantin) > * Use "uint64_t dynfield1[2]" in mbuf instead of 2 uint64_t fields > (sugg by Konstantin) > * Remove unused argument in private function (sugg by Konstantin) > * Fix and simplify locking (sugg by Konstantin) > * Fix minor typo >=20 > rfc -> v1 >=20 > * Rebase on top of master > * Change registration API to use a structure instead of > variables, getting rid of #defines (Stephen's comment) > * Update flag registration to use a similar API as fields. > * Change max name length from 32 to 64 (sugg. by Thomas) > * Enhance API documentation (Haiyue's and Andrew's comments) > * Add a debug log at registration > * Add some words in release note > * Did some performance tests (sugg. by Andrew): > On my platform, reading a dynamic field takes ~3 cycles more > than a static field, and ~2 cycles more for writing. >=20 > app/test/test_mbuf.c | 145 ++++++- > doc/guides/rel_notes/release_19_11.rst | 7 + > lib/librte_mbuf/Makefile | 2 + > lib/librte_mbuf/meson.build | 6 +- > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf.h | 23 +- > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c | 548 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.h | 226 ++++++++++ > lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_version.map | 7 + > 8 files changed, 959 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.c > create mode 100644 lib/librte_mbuf/rte_mbuf_dyn.h >=20 > diff --git a/app/test/test_mbuf.c b/app/test/test_mbuf.c > index b9c2b2500..01cafad59 100644 > --- a/app/test/test_mbuf.c > +++ b/app/test/test_mbuf.c > @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ > #include [snip] > +/** > + * Helper macro to access to a dynamic field. > + */ > +#define RTE_MBUF_DYNFIELD(m, offset, type) ((type)((uintptr_t)(m) + (off= set))) > + The suggested macro is missed ? ;-) /** * Helper macro to access to a dynamic flag. */ #define RTE_MBUF_DYNFLAG(offset) (1ULL << (offset)) BTW, should we have a place to put the registered dynamic fields and flags names together (a name overview -- detail Link to --> PMD's help page) ?=20 Since rte_mbuf_dynfield:name & rte_mbuf_dynflag:name work as a API style, users can check how many 'names' registered, developers can check whether the names they want to use are registered or not ? They don't need to have to check the rte_errno ... Just a suggestion for user experience. >=20 > } DPDK_18.08; > -- > 2.20.1