2015-12-23 10:44, Yuanhan Liu: > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 01:38:29AM -0800, Rich Lane wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 9:47 PM, Yuanhan Liu <yuanhan.liu at > > linux.intel.com> > > wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 08:47:28PM -0800, Rich Lane wrote: > > > The queue state change callback is the one new API that needs to be > > > added because > > > normal NICs don't have this behavior. > > > > Again I'd ask, will vring_state_changed() be enough, when above issues > > are resolved: vring_state_changed() will be invoked at new_device()/ > > destroy_device(), and of course, ethtool change? > > > > > > It would be sufficient. It is not a great API though, because it requires > > the > > application to do the conversion from struct virtio_net to a DPDK port > > number, > > and from a virtqueue index to a DPDK queue id and direction. Also, the > > current > > implementation often makes this callback when the vring state has not > > actually > > changed (enabled -> enabled and disabled -> disabled). > > > > If you're asking about using vring_state_changed() _instead_ of the link > > status > > event and rte_eth_dev_socket_id(), > > No, I like the idea of link status event and rte_eth_dev_socket_id(); > I was just wondering why a new API is needed. Both Tetsuya and I > were thinking to leverage the link status event to represent the > queue stats change (triggered by vring_state_changed()) as well, > so that we don't need to introduce another eth event. However, I'd > agree that it's better if we could have a new dedicate event. > > Thomas, here is some background for you. For vhost pmd and linux > virtio-net combo, the queue can be dynamically changed by ethtool, > therefore, the application wishes to have another eth event, say > RTE_ETH_EVENT_QUEUE_STATE_CHANGE, so that the application can > add/remove corresponding queue to the datapath when that happens. > What do you think of that?
Yes it is an event. So I don't understand the question. What may be better than a specific rte_eth_event_type?
