> -----Original Message----- > From: Jerin Jacob <jerinjac...@gmail.com> > Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 3:04 PM > To: Nipun Gupta <nipun.gu...@nxp.com> > Cc: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <pbhagavat...@marvell.com>; Jerin Jacob > Kollanukkaran <jer...@marvell.com>; Marko Kovacevic > <marko.kovace...@intel.com>; Ori Kam <or...@mellanox.com>; Bruce > Richardson <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Radu Nicolau > <radu.nico...@intel.com>; Akhil Goyal <akhil.go...@nxp.com>; Tomasz > Kantecki <tomasz.kante...@intel.com>; Sunil Kumar Kori <sk...@marvell.com>; > Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agra...@nxp.com>; dev@dpdk.org > Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 04/11] examples/l3fwd: add ethdev setup > based on eventdev > > On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 2:20 PM Nipun Gupta <nipun.gu...@nxp.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Pavan Nikhilesh Bhagavatula <pbhagavat...@marvell.com> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 2, 2020 11:52 AM > > > To: Nipun Gupta <nipun.gu...@nxp.com>; Jerin Jacob Kollanukkaran > > > <jer...@marvell.com>; Marko Kovacevic <marko.kovace...@intel.com>; Ori > > > Kam <or...@mellanox.com>; Bruce Richardson > > > <bruce.richard...@intel.com>; Radu Nicolau <radu.nico...@intel.com>; > > > Akhil Goyal <akhil.go...@nxp.com>; Tomasz Kantecki > > > <tomasz.kante...@intel.com>; Sunil Kumar Kori <sk...@marvell.com>; > > > Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agra...@nxp.com> > > > Cc: dev@dpdk.org > > > Subject: RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 04/11] examples/l3fwd: add ethdev setup > > > based on eventdev > > > > > > >> >&local_port_conf); > > > >> >> + if (ret < 0) > > > >> >> + rte_exit(EXIT_FAILURE, > > > >> >> + "Cannot configure device: err=%d, > > > >> >> port=%d\n", > > > >> >> + ret, port_id); > > > >> >> + > > > >> > > > > >> >We should be using number of RX queues as per the config option > > > >> >provided in the arguments. > > > >> >L3fwd is supposed to support multiple queue. Right? > > > >> > > > >> The entire premise of using event device is to showcase packet > > > >scheduling to > > > >> cores > > > >> without the need for splitting packets across multiple queues. > > > >> > > > >> Queue config is ignored when event mode is selected. > > > > > > > >For atomic queues, we have single queue providing packets to a single > > > >core at a time till processing on that core is completed, irrespective of > > > >the flows on that hardware queue. > > > >And multiple queues are required to distribute separate packets on > > > >separate cores, with these atomic queues maintaining the ordering and > > > >not scheduling on other core, until processing core has completed its > > > >job. > > > >To have this solution generic, we should also take config parameter - > > > >(port, number of queues) to enable multiple ethernet RX queues. > > > > > > > > > > Not sure I follow we connect Rx queue to an event queue which is then > > > linked to multiple event ports which are polled on > > > by respective cores. > > > > This is what we too support, but with atomic queue case the scenario gets > little complex. > > Each atomic queue can be scheduled only to one event port at a time, until > > all > the events from > > that event port are processed. Then only it can move to other event port. > > This would make it a poll mode. We might as well use normal PMD + RSS > for the same instead. > i.e use l3fwd in poll mode. It will be the same in terms of performance. > Right?
We do not need to have a complete config, but can have a parameter as number of RX queues per port. We will send a patch on top of this to support the same. Thanks, Nipun > > > > > To have separate event ports process packets at same time in atomic > > scenario, > multiple queues > > are required. As l3fwd supports multiple queues, it seems legitimate to add > > the > support. > > > > Thanks, > > Nipun > > > > > How would increasing Rx queues help? Distributing flows from single event > > > queue to multiple event ports is the responsibility > > > of Event device as per spec. > > > Does DPAA/2 function differently? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Pavan. > > > > > > >Regards, > > > >Nipun > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> >Regards, > > > >> >Nipun > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Regards, > > > >> Pavan.
