On 16-Jul-19 2:46 PM, jer...@marvell.com wrote:
From: Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com>

When bus layer selected the preferred mode as RTE_IOVA_DC then
select the IOVA mode as RTE_IOVA_VA.

The RTE_IOVA_VA selected as the default because,

1) All drivers work in RTE_IOVA_VA mode, irrespective of physical
address availability.

2) By default, the mempool, first asks for IOVA-contiguous memory
using RTE_MEMZONE_IOVA_CONTIG and this is slow in IOVA as PA mode
and it may affect the application boot time.

Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com>
---

I should celebrate now :D

  doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst | 10 ++++++++--
  lib/librte_eal/linux/eal/eal.c                  |  6 ++----
  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst 
b/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst
index 77307e3a6..1b0343eee 100644
--- a/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/prog_guide/env_abstraction_layer.rst
@@ -445,8 +445,14 @@ kernels.
  - if the preferred mode is RTE_IOVA_PA but there is no access to Physical
    Addresses, then EAL init will fail early, since later probing of the devices
    would fail anyway,
-- if the preferred mode is RTE_IOVA_DC then based on the Physical Addresses
-  availability, the preferred mode is adjusted to RTE_IOVA_PA or RTE_IOVA_VA.
+- if the preferred mode is RTE_IOVA_DC then select the IOVA mode as 
RTE_IOVA_VA.
+  The RTE_IOVA_VA selected as the default because,
+
+#. All drivers work in RTE_IOVA_VA mode, irrespective of physical address 
availability.

Is there anywhere we can document that any new driver must support both before being accepted?

+
+#. By default, the mempool, first asks for IOVA-contiguous memory using 
``RTE_MEMZONE_IOVA_CONTIG``,
+   and this is slow in IOVA as PA mode and it may affect the application boot 
time.

I would also add a point about usability improvement for use-cases which require large amounts of IOVA-contiguous memory.

Otherwise,

Acked-by: Anatoly Burakov <anatoly.bura...@intel.com>

--
Thanks,
Anatoly

Reply via email to